Local
Church’s rental of E Street Cinema prompts boycott talk
Bishop Jackson led fight against D.C. marriage law
A Maryland-based church whose pastor is leading efforts to overturn D.C.’s same-sex marriage law is holding Sunday morning services at the E Street Cinema in downtown Washington, prompting some activists to call for a boycott of the theater.
In a little-noticed development, Hope Christian Church of Beltsville, Md., recently began holding weekly worship services at the theater at 8:30 a.m. A church employee told DC Agenda on Tuesday that its pastor, Bishop Harry Jackson, leads the weekly services at the theater, which is located at 11th and E streets, N.W.
The church’s web site says that it holds at least three additional Sunday morning services at its main facility on Ammendale Road in Beltsville.
Landmark Theaters, owners of E Street Cinema, told DC Agenda that it could not “refuse service” to the church and was obligated in this instance to rent space to Hope Christian Church.
“Landmark Theatres rents our auditoriums out to many different types of organizations and we do not have the right to refuse service to anyone based on their religious beliefs,” an unidentified spokesperson wrote Monday in an e-mail to DC Agenda.
Timothy Daniels, a gay D.C. resident, has called the statement unacceptable and created a Facebook group promoting the boycott of E Street Cinema.
In past years, E Street Cinema has served as one of the venues for Reel Affirmations, D.C.’s annual LGBT film festival. It remains known as a showcase for LGBT films and documentaries.
“Hope Christian Church is headed by Bishop Harry Jackson, a vehemently vocal opponent of the D.C. LGBT community,” Daniels says in his Facebook message.
Jackson has repeatedly attempted to overturn the same-sex marriage law that the D.C. City Council passed and Mayor Adrian Fenty signed. His attempts have been unsuccessful, and the marriage law is scheduled to take effect March 3, when Congress completes its review of the statute.
The city’s Board of Elections & Ethics has ruled three times that Jackson’s request for a ballot measure to put the law to voters cannot be held because, if approved, it would violate the D.C. Human Rights Act. The board’s decisions have been upheld by at least three D.C. Superior Court judges that have turned down Jackson’s appeals of the board’s rulings.
“[Jackson] continues to spread lies and falsehoods about gay marriage rights in the District,” Daniels says in his Facebook message. “We urge all of you that live in D.C. who regularly attend movies at E Street Cinema to cease patronizing their business, and instead [move to] contacting Landmark Theatres and expressing your strong disappointment at this blatant hypocrisy.”
But Rick Rosendall, vice president of the Gay & Lesbian Activists Alliance, said it would be a mistake to boycott or penalize E Street Cinema for renting space to Jackson’s church. He noted that he and other activists would likely speak out against a boycott.
“The E Street Cinema is a public accommodation and cannot discriminate on the basis of religion,” Rosendall said. “The same Human Rights Act that protects us protects Bishop Jackson and his followers.”
He said the strategy employed by GLAA and a coalition of other LGBT groups to oppose Jackson through legal and political channels has succeeded.
“We and our allies have consistently defeated Bishop Jackson in the polls, in the D.C. Council, at the Board of Elections & Ethics, in Superior Court, and most recently in the Court of Appeals,” he said. “That doesn’t justify complacency, but it should give us pause before yielding to an impulse to return intolerance for intolerance.”
Daniels said about 200 people have joined his Facebook group calling for a boycott of the theater and the group would discuss whether to go ahead with a boycott or take other measures, such as a letter-writing campaign urging Landmark Theatres to find a way to stop renting space to Jackson’s church.
“In my opinion, there comes a point where you can only get slapped in the face so many times before you slap back,” he said.
Maryland
White House threatens Anne Arundel schools over gender identity policy
District faces possible legal action or loss of federal funding
By JESSICA CALEFATI | The Trump-Vance administration on Monday threatened to punish Anne Arundel County’s school system with legal action or the loss of federal funding for allegedly withholding information about a student’s gender identity and transition from the child’s parents.
The U.S. Education and Justice Departments together determined that the suburban Maryland district treats students’ gender identities as confidential medical information that cannot be shared with parents, in violation of federal student privacy law, according to a news release. A federal lawsuit filed against the district earlier this month made similar claims.
“As a mother and a grandmother, it is unconscionable that any school district would hide the most sensitive information about children in their care from their own parents,” U.S. Secretary of Education Linda McMahon said in a statement. “This is not only an affront to basic moral principles, but also to parents’ rights under federal law.”
The rest of this article can be read on the Baltimore Banner’s website.
Virginia
Winsome Earle-Sears launches campaign against Va. marriage equality amendment
Former LG lost to Abigail Spanberger in 2025 gubernatorial race
Less than a year after losing Virginia’s gubernatorial race, former Lt. Gov. Winsome Earle-Sears is campaigning across the state against constitutional amendments that would protect marriage equality and reproductive freedom.
She is launching a statewide “Life and Marriage Tour” ahead of November’s election.
Although same-sex couples can legally marry under the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2015 Obergefell v. Hodges decision, Virginia’s constitution still contains language that defines marriage as between one man and one woman. Supporters say removing the language would protect marriage equality should federal precedent change.
The original ban was written into the state constitution in 2006.
It has been hinted at in the past by Supreme Court Judge Clarence Thomas that he would consider revisiting Obergefell v. Hodges regarding contraception and marriage rights for same-sex couples. He stated this in his concurring opinion regarding the Dobbs v. Jackson ruling, which allows for state-level abortion bans.
Equality Virginia Executive Director Narissa Rahaman said removing the ban would bring the state’s constitution in line with existing law.
“20 years after banning marriage equality, it’s time for our commonwealth to fully complete our evolution — and finish the job on protecting marriage equality for all,” Rahaman said.
In an email to supporters, Earle-Sears said these amendments “raise serious concerns” and could alter principles about which Virginians care.
“That is why our efforts are focused not only on informing voters, but also encouraging them to carefully consider these proposals and vote NO on both amendments,” Earle-Sears said.
Virginia voters will consider three constitutional amendments this November.
Earle-Sears is campaigning for voters to reject two of them: the Virginia Remove Constitutional Same-Sex Marriage Ban Amendment and the Right to Reproductive Freedom Amendment.
A “Yes” vote on the Same-Sex Marriage Ban Amendment would include removing a provision that states marriage is between one man and one woman and prohibitng the state from denying a marriage license to two adults based on their sex, gender, or race, according to the Virginia Department of Elections.
In 2025, during debates against now Gov. Abigail Spanberger, Earle-Sears argued it is not discrimination to think that gay people should not be allowed to marry. She claims it conflicts with her faith.
According to ABC 8, in 2024 she wrote that she had a “moral opposition” to marriage equality, after former Gov. Glenn Youngkin, a Republican, signed a marriage equality bill that barred denying marriage licenses based on sex, gender, or race.
According to the Virginia Department of Elections, a “Yes” vote on the Reproductive Freedom amendment supports adding a section to the state constitution that would give Virginians the right to make and carry out decisions regarding reproductive healthcare, except in specific exemptions.
The Virginia Department of Elections wrote that if accepted, the amendment would allow the state government to pass laws to regulate abortion care in the third trimester of pregnancy, but require abortion care when it is medically needed to protect the life and health of the pregnant person or because the fetus is not viable.
During the 2025 election cycle, Earle-Sears was clear on her anti-abortion stance.
According to the Virginia Independent, she utilized campaign funds to donate to the Family Foundation of Virginia. The group is a faith-based, anti-abortion, and anti-in vitro fertilization non-profit.
The “Life and Marriage Tour” will include traveling throughout Virginia to speak with citizens, churches, community organizations, and local leaders. The exact locations have yet to be announced.
District of Columbia
D.C. Council approves increased funding for Mayor’s Office of LGBTQ Affairs
Increase attached to 2027 budget bill
The D.C. Council on July 14 gave final approval for the city’s fiscal year 2027 budget that includes an amendment calling for increasing the number and size of funding grants that the Mayor’s Office of LGBTQ Affairs provides for local organizations providing services for the LGBTQ community.
The amendment, called the “LGBTQ Community Grant Amendment Act of 2026,” was introduced earlier this year by D.C. Council member Zachary Parker (D-Ward 5), the Council’s only gay member.
The D.C. LGBTQ Budget Coalition called the Parker amendment “a historic measure that establishes the District’s most sustainable model for a vehicle for investing in LGBTQ communities.”
The Council approved the version of the FY 2027 budget bill with the attached Parker amendment in its first of two required votes on June 9. Shortly after voting unanimously to give final approval of an earlier version of the two-part budget measure on July 7 that includes the Parker amendment, the Council sent the bill to Mayor Muriel Bowser for her signature.
Bowser has expressed strong opposition to several provisions in the $22 billion budget measure passed by the Council that are unrelated to the Parker amendment regarding the Office of LGBTQ Affairs. The mayor has yet to say whether she will sign, veto, or choose not to sign the bill.
The latter option would allow the bill to become law if Congress does not choose to overturn it during its required 30-day legislative review period for all D.C. bills. Political observers believe the Council will vote to override a veto if Bowser chooses to veto the bill.
When contacted by the Washington Blade on July 22 to determine where the mayor stands on the budget bill, mayoral spokesperson Daniel Gleick said only, there was “no update on the budget just yet.”
Among other things, the Parker amendment calls for the Mayor’s Office of LGBTQ Affairs to issue a $980,000 grant in FY 2027 to a private, nonprofit organization in partnership with the office “for the purpose of supporting programs that promote the welfare of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and questioning community.”
It would allocate $680,000 of that funding total from existing funds from the city’s community affairs grants program and calls for $200,000 in newly appropriated funds.
It says the organization selected would also initiate its own fundraising effort to expand the amount of funds beyond the amount the office would provide, enabling it to provide larger grants to a greater number of local LGBTQ organizations.
“The legislation arrives at a critical moment, as LGBTQ-serving organizations face unprecedented uncertainty,” the D.C. Budget Coalition said in its comment on the Parker amendment. “Growing demand for services is colliding with shrinking resources, federal attacks on LGBTQ programs, and ongoing threats to local funding streams,” the coalition’s statement says.
In what some observers have called a highly controversial action; the budget bill approved by the Council reverses and restores millions of dollars in budget cuts proposed by Bowser in the budget she submitted to the Council earlier this year.
Among other things, the Council’s budget preserves the current level of funding for housing vouchers, childcare, paid family leave, and other programs slated to be cut in the mayor’s proposed budget, according to a report by the Washington Post.
Bowser points out that the Council approved budget bill calls for using $150 million from the city’s reserve fund, which she and others have said could put the city in jeopardy in future years. The mayor has said the cuts were needed to prevent a major funding shortfall brought about by the action by Republicans in Congress to cut the city’s budget by over a billion dollars.

