Connect with us

National

Reporters hammer Carney on marriage, Biden’s remarks

W.H. spox has no updates, says Duncan was speaking his own views

Published

on

White House Press Secretary Jay Carney (Blade file photo by Michael Key)

White House Press Secretary faced a litany of questions Monday on same-sex marriage following favorable remarks on the issue that Vice President Joe Biden gave earlier in the week.

The preponderance of the daily news briefing consisted of inquiries attempting to square President Obama’s ongoing evolution with the remarks on same-sex marriage from Biden, who said Sunday he’s “absolutely comfortable” with married gay couples having the same rights as straight couples.

Carney referred to clarification immediately issued Sunday from the vice president’s office saying Biden’s views were in the line with the president — despite his remarks earlier in the day on NBC’s “Meet the Press.”

“I have no update on the president’s personal views,” Carney said. “What the vice president said  yesterday was to make the same point that the president has made previously. Committed and loving same-sex couples deserve the same rights and protection enjoyed by all Americans, and that we oppose any effort to rollback those rights.”

Carney said Biden’s comments stirred “a little bit of an overreaction” and said clarification went out from the vice president’s office because reporters sent inquiries and media outlets had the No. 2 in the administration had endorsed same-sex marriage.

As he’s done in the past, Carney said he has no updates on Obama’s marriage evolution; listed the president’s LGBT accomplishments, including repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell”; and reiterated the Obama opposes discriminatory efforts against gay couples.

While Biden remarks made up the lion’s share of the questions. Carney also faced questions on  Education Secretary Arne Duncan’s endorsement of same-sex marriage earlier in the day on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe.” Carney said the Cabinet official was offering his personal views on the matter.

“Secretary Duncan was asked a question on his personal views on an issue, and he offered them,” Carney said. “Obviously, this is an issue that many people have a view on, and we respect the right of all people to have a personal opinion.”

Under questioning from the Washington Blade, Carney dodged when asked whether he remembers the vice president speaking so favorably as he did in Sunday on the issue of same-sex marriage. Before becoming White House press secretary, Carney was Biden’s communications director for the first two years of the Obama administration.

“I think I will simply point you to what the vice president said yesterday, and the vice president supports this president’s policies in support for LGBT rights,” Carney said.

Carney gave a similar dodge when pressed when asked whether Biden’s remarks represent a sign of progress for the administration on the marriage evolution.

“I would just point you to what the vice president said,” Carney said.

On Sunday, Biden said he’s “absolutely comfortable” with the idea of married gay couples having the “same exact rights” as straight couples, which was reported by many media outlets and bloggers as an endorsement of same-sex marriage. Biden’s office has said his comments weren’t anything new and the vice president is evolving on the issue like President Obama.

The president himself has yet to articulate support for same-sex marriage. In October 2010, Obama said in response to a question from AMERICAblog’s Joe Sudbay that he could evolve to support marriage equality, but hasn’t yet made any announcement.

During the news briefing, ABC News’ Jake Tapper pointed to comments that Obama has made — most recently in Rolling Stone Magazine — saying he doesn’t want to “make news” on his position on same-sex marriage. Tapper said the comment suggests Obama actually supports marriage equality, but doesn’t want to express that view.

In response, Carney said Tapper was making his own characterization of the president’s views on marriage.

“I think when people have asked him that and he has no update to give them or no change in his views to put forward that he’s simply saying that, I have nothing new for you on that; his position is what it was,” Carney said.

Carney said Obama’s record is “considerable and unparalleled” and proceeded to mention some LGBT accomplishments, but Tapper said he doesn’t “want to hear the same talking points 15 times in a row.” Carney responded the president’s accomplishments are serious work.

“We’re talking — talking points to you; serious, substantial rights to others, OK?” Carney said. “Repealing ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ is a serious matter. The efforts that this administration has taken on behalf of LGBT citizens are a serious matter.”

In the end, Tapper accused of the administration of being “cynical” by withholding Obama’s support for same-sex marriage presumably until after Election Day.

“And if that is the likely future of the president and this position, given that you don’t have any news to drop on it, or probably his mind has been made up, why not just come out and say it and let voters decide?” Tapper said. “It seems — it seems cynical to hide this until after the election.”

Other noteworthy inquiries why the president opposes bans on same-sex marriage, but doesn’t support same-sex itself. Another reporter from NPR asked whether marriage is a civil liberty, prompting Carney to defer the question to a “civil libertarian.”

The Wall Street Journal’s Laura Meckler asked whether Obama wants the Democratic Party platform to conform to his views on marriage as LGBT advocates have been pushing for an inclusion of same-sex marriage in the document. Carney deferred the inquiry to the Democratic National Committee.

A transcript of the exchange between Carney and marriage questions follows:

Q:  …This morning, the Education Secretary, Arne Duncan, put himself on record in favor of gay marriage. Yesterday, the vice president indicated something along the same lines.  Does this box the President in ahead of the election?  Have his views changed at all on this subject?

Jay Carney:  Well, I have no update on the president’s personal views. What the vice president said yesterday was to make the same point that the president has made previously, that committed and loving same-sex couples deserve the same rights and protections enjoyed by all Americans, and that we oppose any effort to roll back those rights. That’s why this administration opposes the Defense of Marriage Act and supports legislation to repeal it. The administration also has stopped defending the constitutionality of Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act in legal challenges.

Secretary Duncan was asked a question about his personal views on an issue and he offered them.  And obviously this is an issue that many people have a view on and we respect the right of all people to have an opinion — a personal opinion.

Q: If asked at this point a similar question for his personal view, would the president give it?

Carney: I think the President is the right person to describe his own personal views. He, as you know, said that his views on this were evolving, and I don’t have an update for you on that.

Q: Jay, the president has raised millions of dollars from LGBT donors, many of whom say that they believe in a second term the President will come out in support of gay marriage.  So doesn’t he owe them — or owe voters in general — his direct response and just stop dancing around the issue and telling voters will he or won’t he support gay marriage in a second term?

Carney: The president was asked this and said that his views on — his personal views on this were evolving. The president does have, as you noted, significant support in the LGBT community, and that’s because of his unparalleled record in support of LGBT rights. That includes the fight to repeal successfully “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” It includes signing hate crimes legislation that includes LGBT persons. It includes ending a legal defense of the Defense of Marriage Act.  It includes ensuring hospital visitation rights for LGBT patients and their loved ones, and I could go on. His record on the LGBT rights is simply unparalleled, and he will continue to fight for those rights going forward.

Q:  Jay, on June 23, he told an LGBT audience, “Everybody deserves to be able to live and love as they see fit.  I don’t have to tell the people in this room we’ve got a ways to go in the struggle.” What is he referring to if not gay marriage?

Carney: Well, I think you have heard him say and those in the administration like myself who speak for him that he strongly opposes efforts to restrict rights, to repeal rights for same-sex couples. He has made his opposition to those efforts in various states known and will continue to do so.

I think it’s a statement of obvious fact that full enjoyment of rights by LGBT citizens has not been achieved uniformly across the country.  And that’s why he has taken a stand on — in opposition to efforts in some states to deny those rights and discriminate against LGBT citizens.

Q: So can you explain then clearly what — how Vice President Biden, who said, there is a consensus building toward gay marriage in this nation, and then came out yesterday saying that he is absolutely comfortable with men marrying men and women marrying women having equal rights, is not an endorsement of gay marriage?

Carney:  Well, I think the Vice President expressed his personal views.  He also said he was evolving on the issue.

Q: He did not say that, Jay.

Carney: He did.

Q: No. His spokesperson said that afterwards.

Carney:  Let me just be clear, though.  The vice president — what he said about the protection of rights of citizens is completely consistent with the president’s position on this issue, and his description of the way the country has moved on this issue I think is wholly accurate. I think we all have seen the data that describes an evolution of views across the country on these issues. So I don’t think there’s anything surprising about him saying that.

Q: You’re trying to have it both ways before an election.

Carney:  No. Look, this President has been extremely aggressive in supporting LGBT rights. He fought against those who oppose the repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” and achieved that in this administration. There are those who want to bring “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” back. He very robustly fights against efforts to restrict or deny rights to LGBT citizens and discriminate against them, and he’ll continue to do so.

And again, you didn’t want to hear it, but there’s a long, long list of the actions that this administration has taken on behalf of LGBT citizens in this country. And that’s a record that the President is very proud of.

Q: Okay. And back to the same-sex marriage issue. I think one of the issues is that when asked about the president’s position, the president no longer said he is evolving on the issue. He says, I don’t have any news to make on that. That’s what Stephanie Cutter, a few minutes ago on cable said — I don’t have any news for you. The suggestion is that there is news there and you guys are just waiting for the proper time to drop it, likely after November.

Carney:  I think that’s your characterization, Jake.

Q: I think that’s what it means —

Carney:  I think the president said that he was evolving, and he had — I think when people have asked him that and he has no update to give them or no change in his views to put forward, that he’s simply saying that I have nothing new for you on that. His position is what it was. And that’s with regards to his personal views.

What I think needs to be remembered here is what he has done in office in support of LGBT rights. And that record is extensive and considerable and unparalleled. And he’ll continue to fight for those rights as long as he’s in office.

Q: Positing that the president has done more for LGBT individuals than any other President in history — so you don’t need to say that again — the question is —

Carney: But I will.

Q: Just for this question. When you get to Norah, whatever you want. But the question is, I think there are very few people who think that the president is not going to, after November, whether he’s reelected or not, come out in favor of same-sex marriage. I think there are very few people on the president’s campaign who doubt that; very few people who support the president, very few people who oppose the president who have any doubt that that is what is going to likely happen. And if that is the likely future of the president and this position, given that you don’t have any news to drop on it where probably his mind has been made up, why not just come out and say it and let voters decide?  It seems cynical to hide this until after the election.

Carney: Jake, I think the president’s position is well known. He’s spoken to this. It’s gotten a great deal of coverage. I don’t have an update to provide you on the President’s position. It is what it was. I’m sorry you don’t want to hear about the president’s support for LGBT rights because it’s considerable.

Q: It’s not that I don’t want to hear it.  I don’t want to hear the same talking points 15 times in a row.

Carney: I think the — talking points to you; serious substantial rights to others.  Okay?  “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” — repealing “Don’t Ask, Don’t tTell” is a serious matter. The efforts that this administration has taken on behalf of LGBT citizens are serious matters.

Q:  I’m not belittling that, Jay. We’re talking about same-sex marriage.

Carney:  I think that’s the context of this discussion. I just don’t have anything more to give to you on the issue of the President’s views.

Q: Because he’s still evolving.  Not because you don’t have news for me, it’s because he’s still evolving.

Carney:  It is as it was, yes.

Norah.

Q: Why does the president oppose same-sex marriage?

Carney: I would just point you to what the president has said in the past, both during his campaign for President in 2008 and in answer to a question at the end of 2010. I really don’t have an update for you, Norah.

Q: Is the President comfortable with the fact of men marrying men and women marrying women?

Carney:  The president is comfortable with same-sex couples, as the president — the vice president said, being entitled to the same rights and the civil rights and civil liberties as other Americans. And that’s why he has fought for those equal rights and why he’s opposed efforts to discriminate against LGBT citizens and to take away rights that have been established by law.

Q: Biden — the vice president appears to have evolved on the issue, but the president is still evolving — is that a fair characterization?

Carney: I will leave it to individuals to describe their own personal views. What I can explain to you is what the president’s positions are on issues, the actions he has taken at a policy level on behalf of LGBT Americans, and his commitment to continue to take actions on their behalf to protect and defend their rights.

Q: Let me ask you this.  You have a number of Democratic governors throughout this country — Governor O’Malley, Governor Cuomo, Governor Malloy, to name a view, now the vice president, who all support same-sex marriage. Why doesn’t President Obama support same-sex marriage?

Carney:  I just don’t have an update for you, Norah, on the president’s position on his personal views. I can tell you that he is a absolutely committed supporter of LGBT rights. His record bears that out. It is an unparalleled record of support for LGBT citizens and their rights, and he’s proud of it and he’ll run on it.

And I think that it’s important to remember when we talk about those accomplishments under this administration that they are far more than talking points; they are considerable, serious demonstrations of progress, important progress — progress that others would take away and reverse.  This president is committed to not letting that happen.

Q: When you now say the vice president is evolving — he did not say that, as was pointed out, but he used some key words beyond what Norah just quoted.  He also said that they are entitled to the same exact rights, all the civil rights, all the civil liberties. Does that mean he supports same-sex marriage? 

Carney: I was pointing to this statement that the vice president’s office put out yesterday describing his statements, and I don’t have any elaboration on that. I can tell you that what he said is completely consistent in that paragraph with the President’s views that LGBT citizens should enjoy the same rights and that they should not be discriminated against. And efforts to take away those rights are something that this President strongly opposes.

Q: But how come when the president proposes something like the American Jobs Act — you could name anything — and he says — he travels around the country and says, you’re entitled to press members of Congress, tell them, are they for this or are they against it — why can’t you from this podium say whether or not the President supports or opposes same-sex marriage?

Carney: Well, I can tell you that the president has spoken about this, and that his views have not changed and I have no update to give you on them.

Q: Why did the administration feel like they had to put out a statement clarifying what the vice president said?

Carney: Well, I don’t know that the — the office of the vice president put out a statement.  I think that there was a lot of interest generated by the comments and the office of the vice president put out a statement to make it clear what the vice president was saying.

But again, I think that there is a little bit of an overreaction here.  The Vice President supports and made clear he supports the President’s policies when it comes to protecting the rights of LGBT citizens, and he also has his own personal views about the issue, as does the President, as do most people.  So the President’s record on LGBT rights is extensive, and he is committed to working to move forward on that issue.

Q: Is it fair to say that publicly the president and the vice president disagree on gay marriage?

Carney:  No, I don’t think that’s what the vice president said yesterday. But again, I don’t think that’s the point. The president and the vice president and everyone in this administration support the initiatives that this president has taken to protect and defend the rights of all Americans, including LGBT Americans.

Q: When it came to the issue of marriage before, there was a time when the president was somebody who believed in deferring it to the states. Does he still feel that way?

Carney: Well, the president believes that the states are deciding this issue, and he has made clear —

Q: — clearly a state issue, not a federal issue?

Carney: Well, I think that we certainly oppose efforts to take away rights at a federal level, which some politicians suppose — a constitutional amendment to deny rights to LGBT Americans across the country — we oppose that. The president opposes that. States have taken action on this issue, and the President believes that when the process works that it’s a positive thing. He also opposes efforts in states to repeal rights or deny rights to LGBT citizens that have already been established.

Q:  So what would that put him — where would the president be then on the amendment in North Carolina that would ban gay marriage?

Carney:  The president, through the campaign — but the same person opposes efforts to deny the rights of citizens in any state where those rights have been established.

Q: So he opposes — so help me out there. He opposes bans on gay marriage but he doesn’t yet support gay marriage? 

Carney: The record is clear that the president has long opposed divisive and discriminatory efforts to deny rights and benefits to same-sex couples. That is a position he has taken that precedes his taking a position in North Carolina. It’s a position he’s taken in other states where this has been an issue. Yes, he is opposed to efforts in states to deny rights that have been provided to citizens.

Q: You understand why there is so much confusion because you’re saying he opposes bans on gay marriage but he’s not yet for gay marriage.  I mean, that’s —

Carney:  He believes that the states are — marriage is a state issue, and the states have the right to take action on it. What he opposes is efforts to repeal rights that have been granted to LGBT citizens. He thinks that’s discriminatory and wrong.

Q:  There’s going to be an effort this summer to have support for gay marriage as part of the Democratic platform. Does the president believe it’s important that the platform reflects his views?

Carney: Well, on the issue of the platform, which hasn’t been developed yet, I would refer you to the DNC.

Q: My question was whether the president — this is a question for the president — whether the President thinks that the platform just kind of doesn’t matter, which some people say, or whether it really is a statement of his views whatever those may be?

Carney: I think it’s a statement of the party’s view and has long been that. But I don’t have — I haven’t had that discussion with him. But I think a platform is a statement of a party’s views. It is called a Democratic or Republican Party platform. But for questions about the development of that platform I’d refer you to the DNC.

Q: He is the head of his party.

Carney: Again, I don’t have a different answer for you, Laura. It’s a platform that hasn’t been developed. I would point you to the DNC for questions about it.

Q: Just to get clear on your criteria, you said that you oppose state efforts to take away rights. In North Carolina gays can’t marry now, so what is the reason to oppose North Carolina?

Carney: The referendum would, as I understand it, restrict and deny rights to LGBT Americans. And the president —

Q: That they currently have in North Carolina?

Carney: That’s my understanding, yes.

Q:  Okay. My other question is, is marriage a civil liberty?

Carney:  You have to ask civil libertarians or lawyers.

Q: Well, in the White House view, is marriage a civil liberty?

Carney: We believe that — the president believes strongly that LGBT Americans should enjoy the same legal rights, and he opposes efforts to deny rights to LGBT American and discriminate against them.

Q: Okay. Just another question. It’s pretty rare when somebody runs for office saying, in effect, I’m getting ready to change my mind. And you’ve really savaged Mitt Romney for changing his mind, and I’m wondering if you don’t run some risk of looking kind of too clever by half here.

Carney: Look, I don’t have an update for you on the president’s personal views. He described them in response to a question. This has gotten a great deal of coverage in the past. That’s the answer he has and I don’t have a new answer for you.

Q: But what would you say is the definition of “evolving”? You’ve said it so many times, it has to mean something specific.

Carney: The president said that his views on this are evolving. I think —

Q: Is he getting ready to change?

Carney: Not necessarily. I think he just said they were evolving. And that’s at a personal level. His views on LGBT rights are crystal-clear and this administration has taken actions that are unparalleled to support those rights. And he’ll continue to take those actions because he thinks that’s the right thing to do.

April.

Q: How could his views be crystal-clear if everybody in this room is needing to ask you questions?

Carney: Chris, I think everybody in this room is reacting in the way that folks often do to one story that takes off and then they run down the field and chase it.  They’re reacting to comments on a Sunday show.  Nothing has changed in the President’s firm commitment to LGBT rights and nothing’s changed and I have no new information —

Q:   — position by the White House.

Carney: It’s the same position. It’s not the position of the White House. The President’s position is —

Q:  Then why did you guys send out statements to clarify?

Carney: Because the vice president’s statements were being misinterpreted by some, so he — so there was an effort to clarify it by the office of the vice president.

Q: Jay, what do you think the word “evolving” means?

Carney:  But that’s where the president is, okay.

Q: Is he unevolved?

Carney: April.

Q: That means changing.

Q: Okay, now I have the ball, let me run with it.

Carney: Policy positions haven’t changed, Jake. And I can remind you that his support for LGBT rights is unprecedented and compares favorably to anyone else out there in the political arena who’s advocating for these rights. And he’ll continue to support them.

April.

Q: All right, now I’m going to take the ball and run down the field with it real quick. And I want you to dissect the evolution.

Carney: No, I’m not going to, April. I’m sorry, I don’t have anything new for you.

Q: No, no, no, no. Okay, you’re not going to, but can you at least say yea or nay when I kind of try to — (laughter) — here’s the deal.  Here’s the deal. Before we heard that it was — he was having a hard time marrying issues of his faith and rights. Is that the evolution? Is that where the evolution issue is a holdup?

Carney: The next time the president has a news conference, if you want to ask him that you’re certainly welcome to. I do not have an update for you on the president’s personal views.

Q: Jay, did the president know before yesterday, did the president know that the vice president was comfortable with men marrying men?  Is this something they’ve discussed?

Carney: I don’t have a readout for you of conversations they’ve had on this issue.

Q: Is it something they’ve discussed?

Carney: Again, I don’t have a readout for you of private conversations that they’ve had.

Q:  Thanks, Jay. Is it still accurate to say, then, that President Obama is opposed to gay marriage?

Carney: I would simply say that his views are evolving, which is what he said. And I don’t have an update for you on that issue.

Amy.

Q: Just to clarify, were you saying that the Vice President’s comments were his personal views?  Were you looping it together with Arne Duncan’s views?

Carney:  The Vice President spoke very clearly about the President’s policies, and they’re entirely consistent with the policies that this President has supported.  He also — he talked about evolution in this country and other issues, and those were personal views. I will simply refer you to the statement that the office of the vice president put out.

Q:  …As someone who’s worked with the vice president before, do you remember him ever speaking so favorably on the issue of same-sex marriage?

Carney: I think I will simply point you to what the vice president said yesterday. The vice president supports this president’s policies in support for LGBT rights.

Q: But is this a sign of progress?

Carney: I would just point you to what the vice president said.

Watch the White House briefing its entirety here (video courtesy White House YouTube page)

 

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

National

Human Rights Watch sharply criticizes US in annual report

Trump-Vance administration ‘working to undermine … very idea of human rights’

Published

on

(Washington Blade photo by Yariel Valdés González)

Human Rights Watch Executive Director Philippe Bolopion on Wednesday sharply criticized the Trump-Vance administration over its foreign policy that includes opposition to LGBTQ rights.

“The U.S. used to actually be a government that was advancing the rights of LGBT people around the world and making sure that it was finding its way into resolutions, into U.N. documents,” he said in response to a question the Washington Blade asked during a press conference at Human Rights Watch’s D.C. offices. “Now we see the opposite movement.”

Human Rights Watch on Wednesday released its annual human rights report that is highly critical of the U.S., among other countries.

“Under relentless pressure from U.S. President Donald Trump, and persistently undermined by China and Russia, the rules-based international order is being crushed, threatening to take with it the architecture human rights defenders have come to rely on to advance norms and protect freedoms,” said Bolopion in its introductory paragraph. “To defy this trend, governments that still value human rights, alongside social movements, civil society, and international institutions, need to form a strategic alliance to push back.”

The report, among other things, specifically notes the U.S. Supreme Court’s Skrmetti decision that uphold a Tennessee law banning gender-affirming medical interventions for minors.

The Trump-Vance administration has withdrawn the U.S. from the U.N. LGBTI Core Group, a group of U.N. member states that have pledged to support LGBTQ and intersex rights, and the U.N. Human Rights Council. Bolopion in response to the Blade’s question during Wednesday’s press conference noted the U.S. has also voted against LGBTQ-inclusive U.N. resolutions.

Maria Sjödin, executive director of Outright International, a global LGBTQ and intersex advocacy group, in an op-ed the Blade published on Jan. 28 wrote the movement around the world since the Trump-Vance administration took office has lost more than $125 million in funding.

The U.S. Agency for International Development, which funded myriad LGBTQ and intersex organizations around the world, officially shut down on July 1, 2025. The Trump-Vance administration last month announced it will expand the global gag rule, which bans U.S. foreign aid for groups that support abortion and/or offer abortion-related services, to include organizations that promote “gender ideology.”

“LGBTQ rights are not just a casualty of the Trump foreign policy,” said Human Rights Watch Washington Director Sarah Yager during the press conference. “It is the intent of the Trump foreign policy.”

The report specifically notes Ugandan authorities since the enactment of the country’s Anti-Homosexuality Act in 2023, which punishes “‘carnal knowledge’ between people of the same gender” with up to life in prison, “have perpetrated widespread discrimination and violence against lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people, their families, and their supporters.” It also highlights Russian authorities “continued to widely use the ‘gay propaganda’ ban” and prosecuted at least two people in 2025 for their alleged role in “‘involving’ people in the ‘international LGBT movement’” that the country’s Supreme Court has deemed an extremist organization.

The report indicates the Hungarian government “continued its attacks on and scapegoating of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people” in 2025, specifically noting its efforts to ban Budapest Pride that more than 100,000 people defied. The report also notes new provisions of Indonesia’s penal code that took effect on Jan. 2 “violate the rights of women, religious minorities, and lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people, and undermine the rights to freedom of speech and association.”

“This includes the criminalization of all sex outside of marriage, effectively rendering adult consensual same-sex conduct a crime in Indonesia for the first time in the country’s history,” it states.

Bolopion at Wednesday’s press conference said women, people with disabilities, religious minorities, and other marginalized groups lose rights “when democracy is retreating.”

“It’s actually a really good example of how the global retreat from the U.S. as an actor that used to be very imperfectly — you know, with a lot of double standards — but used to be part of this global effort to advance rights and norms for everyone,” he said. “Now, not only has it retreated, which many people expected, but in fact, is now working against it, is working to undermine the system, is working to undermine, at times, the very idea of human rights.”

“That’s definitely something we are acutely aware of, and that we are pushing back,” he added.

Continue Reading

Maryland

4th Circuit dismisses lawsuit against Montgomery County schools’ pronoun policy

Substitute teacher Kimberly Polk challenged regulation in 2024

Published

on

(Photo by Sergei Gnatuk via Bigstock)

A federal appeals court has ruled Montgomery County Public Schools did not violate a substitute teacher’s constitutional rights when it required her to use students’ preferred pronouns in the classroom.

The 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in a 2-1 decision it released on Jan. 28 ruled against Kimberly Polk.

The policy states that “all students have the right to be referred to by their identified name and/or pronoun.”

“School staff members should address students by the name and pronoun corresponding to the gender identity that is consistently asserted at school,” it reads. “Students are not required to change their permanent student records as described in the next section (e.g., obtain a court-ordered name and/or new birth certificate) as a prerequisite to being addressed by the name and pronoun that corresponds to their identified name. To the extent possible, and consistent with these guidelines, school personnel will make efforts to maintain the confidentiality of the student’s transgender status.”

The Washington Post reported Polk, who became a substitute teacher in Montgomery County in 2021, in November 2022 requested a “religious accommodation, claiming that the policy went against her ‘sincerely held religious beliefs,’ which are ‘based on her understanding of her Christian religion and the Holy Bible.’”

U.S. District Judge Deborah Boardman in January 2025 dismissed Polk’s lawsuit that she filed in federal court in Beltsville. Polk appealed the decision to the 4th Circuit.

Continue Reading

Minnesota

LGBTQ Minnesotans speak out amid ICE crackdowns

‘Our nervous systems are not set up to live under constant threat’

Published

on

Thumbnail design by Sophie Holland.

Uncloseted Media published this article on Jan. 31.

By HOPE PISONI, SAM DONNDELINGER, SPENCER MACNAUGHTON, and TAYA STRAUSS | Since the start of December, Minneapolis and St. Paul, Minn., have been under the thumb of an extremely heavy presence of the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

During the crackdown, which the agency refers to as “Operation Metro Surge,” at least 3,000 people — mostly undocumented immigrants — have been arrested so far. Tensions came to a boil in January when federal immigration enforcement agents shot and killed poet Renee Good and ICU nurse Alex Pretti on separate occasions. In response, Minneapolis-area residents have started to push back. On Jan. 23, Minnesotans organized the first citywide general strike in the U.S. in nearly 80 years, with tens of thousands protesting and over 700 businesses closing in solidarity. And additional protests are taking place nationwide in at least 36 states over Jan. 30 and 31.

Many queer people have been on the frontline of these protests. We spoke with six people on the ground in the Twin Cities to learn more.

Watch the full interview above or read the transcript here:

SPENCER MACNAUGHTON: Hi everyone, I’m Spencer Macnaughton, and today I am here with six queer folks from the Minneapolis area. Everyone, thank you so much for speaking with me and Uncloseted Media today.

ALL: Thanks for having us.

SM: Yeah, great to be with you. And obviously we reached out to you all based on the headlines. And a lot of what’s playing out at the national level is happening right there in Minneapolis where you guys live. And I just wanted to start to really get a pulse check. How are you guys feeling right now? I have not been in Minneapolis. For folks who only see what’s unfolding on social media or on TV, take us inside what life has been like for you all the past few weeks.

RACHEL DOMINGUEZ: It’s incredibly stressful. Our nervous systems are not set up to live under constant threat. That’s the biggest thing that I think people are not understanding about what’s going on. And I’ve lived in Minneapolis for 41 years. We had a little dress rehearsal for this about five years ago, but it was nothing — there was no precedent. There’s no precedent for this. It’s like water about to come to a boil. Everyone here is stressed out. We’re angry. We’re scared for our safety, for our neighbors’ safety, for our livelihoods. We have no idea when this is gonna stop. Oh, and it’s two fucking degrees out.

JUNE REICHERT: It’s hard to go on like normal when this is happening. Part of my, and I’m sure everybody in your profession, is to not even acknowledge it. Pretend that everything’s okay while you’re at work, while you are going to school, while you are going shopping and everything. And little do you know, down the street, a Somali family is being harassed for no good reason. It brings this feeling of sorrow, especially when it does affect your professional life. When somebody who you’ve been working with for a long time, all of a sudden, as part of my job, I can’t get a hold of them. I work with a lot of people from the Hispanic community and they’re just gone. And you just sit wondering. It’s horrible. It’s a horrible feeling.

SM: And June, tell me more about that. That actually happened?

JH: So for what it’s worth, I sell insurance. I have had clients who have been picked up and I can’t get a hold of them. I mean, I can verify what happened to them, but these people I’m able to get a hold of every single day when I need to, to take care of this, that or the other issue. And now I can’t get a hold of them for a week straight. What am I supposed to think? You know?

SKOT RIEFFER: My day job, I work for a catering company. We have no work at my catering company for the next two months because every single event has canceled because of the ICE occupation. And these events are things from corporate events to weddings. And we’re all now without a job, essentially. My catering company is maybe 30 percent white people and so all of us are checking in with everyone else all the time. One of our folks, also a member of the Hispanic community, has lost four family members. They just got kidnapped. And they’re just gone.

ALICIA KOPP: I am the child of a migrant. I’m from a mixed heritage. My father is from Guatemala. He’s been a citizen since ‘83. Right now, we’re not letting him leave the house. We’re running all errands. The stress that you had spoken to earlier, Rachel, that is definitely wearing thin on all of us.

SM: I mean, what type of mental health effects is that having on him by not being able to leave the house and also probably understanding the reasons why he’s not leaving the house?

AK: When I handed him things like, I showed him what was in a whistle kit with the red cards. This is an emergency contact card. On the inside, the top part says, “help me,” and it’s got whoever’s holding it, their information. The bottom has their loved one and their lawyer and contact information. And they carry this in one of these red cards that on one side has your constitutional rights and on the other side says what you would tell to an immigration agent if they tried to stop you. Or you would just put it up to the window in your car or slip it through, so that you don’t have to talk to them. Now, what good it does? Yeah, I don’t exactly know. Because they’re not exactly following the rules, they kind of tell a lot of people, “That doesn’t matter, we don’t care.” But with this contact card, you have it on you, you literally hand it to somebody if you feel like you’re about to get picked up and say, “I need help. Contact this person for me.” Trying to explain to my dad why, even though he’s a citizen now, I wanted him to have this on him if he’s leaving the house? That was hard. And he was a little belligerent at first. I’m just like, “Look, you’ve kept me alive for 50 fricking years. It’s my turn to do the same for you. And right now, they don’t care that you’re a citizen. They just see you and they go, ‘Yep, we don’t want him here.’ And they’re gonna take you away. You’ll be away from your medicine. You’ll be away from us. It will take us how long to figure out where you are.” Even if it’s like hours, that probably isn’t great for somebody that probably shouldn’t be rassled to the ground by young dumb men or women or whoever they are. But you know, it’s hard. It’s really hard for him and it’s hard for all of us because you don’t wanna have to talk to your parents like that.

TERRESA HARDAWAY: I just wanted to comment on how I’m feeling in this moment, and I would say that while I am tired, I’m not exhausted. And it’s because Black people have always been under occupation. And I’m so happy that people are coming to the realization that state violence and national violence is something that affects all of us. But I gotta say my exhaustion probably comes from the long story posts and the Instagram posts of people realizing for the first time that they are also a part of this system. And they realize that they are also subject to be attacked and to be violently murdered in the street, just like Black people, I think that’s where my exhaustion might come in. But I will say, because we are used to this, I know that this is not gonna be the final moment. I don’t want to hold onto this hopelessness that I feel like a lot of folks who are just coming into that realization are starting to feel on their own. And so we have to just keep fighting. And as tired as we are, now is the time for us to actually push the system that we want to stop harming our neighbors.

SM: And how do you push a system in this moment? What is the strategy in terms of pushing? Because, you know, it does feel like a moment where change could happen because there’s so much attention on it.

TH: There are many, many ways that folks can tap into mutual aid networks, can tap into organizations who have been advocating for immigrant rights and equity in those spaces. If there are holes within our neighborhoods that need to be filled, people need food, people need supplies, and they aren’t comfortable leaving their house, there are organizations who have already been doing that work that people can tap and support. People can become legal observers. There is a lot of things that folks could do. This anxiety that I know that we’re all feeling and this exhaustion? I would say focus that into some of the work that’s already happening.

RD: My kid has only gone to Southside Family School for his entire life. That’s where Renee Good, that’s where her kid went. Still goes there actually. So, our kids, first off, they couldn’t be in school. Because the New York Post ran some bullshit article about how our school was some like communist indoctrination training center that recruited her to join an ICE watch. And then all of a sudden death threats, bomb threats, people coming into the teachers’ houses and knocking on the doors and running away. Bomb threat, they had to bring the dogs in. So my kid didn’t even get to go to school for two weeks and now they’re back in school in a secret location. Like this is the fucking Taliban that we’re hiding from.

SM: Wow.

RD: I can’t even say where my kid goes to school. We’re not even supposed to text it.

SM: I’m sorry you have to do that. And I, yeah, and we’ve all seen those harrowing headlines and images of children as young as 2, as young as 5, being taken by ICE over the last few weeks. I wanted to ask more broadly, for the kids you guys know in your life, what is the impact this is having on children?

AK: A lot of stuff for kids are being canceled. I know that the Minnesota Orchestra has canceled their Young People’s Concert Series for the time being because it’s just not safe to go down there. The students that auditioned last spring to be part of the All State Ensembles, all of their concerts have been canceled because it is just not safe.

SR: My partner and I have started doing neighborhood patrols because there’s a daycare two houses down from ours that caters to our small little, poor community around here and everything like that. And so there’s a lot of different folks who go to this daycare. And so every morning from 7:30 ‘til 10, I’m out there, and then from 3 until 5, which is the pickup times. And so we’re out there as observers.

And there’s been some real scary things, and one thing that is really burned in my head was this dad came up and was chatting with me and thanking me for being there and whatnot. He said to me that his kid, his daughter came up to him and asked him, “Dad, what do I do when the men come and take my friends?” And he didn’t have an answer and he was like, “I feel like my job as a dad is to be able to answer these questions and I do not have an answer” and he was sitting there, and we’re outside, it’s –10 and he’s crying. And I’m crying. And our tears are freezing to our damn faces and all I can do is just nod and hug this guy and just be like “yeah, I don’t have an answer either, man.”

SM: You mentioned the ICE patrolling. Tell me about what that is, what you do and why you’re doing it.

SR: We’re just looking for suspicious vehicles. So if out-of-state plates, a slew of identical looking SUVs drive by, we’re marking it, we’re reporting it to the other people in our Signal groups and everything like that. And then in the situation, just the other day, there were three black SUVs that drove by, all of them with ICE agents in full equipment, everything. So we reported all of that. We’re monitoring, we’re taking pictures, we are marking plates, we’re running plates if needed, and just letting every — like there’s a Hmong Market just down the road, and so we let them know. There’s a small, kind of a strip mall that’s almost all owned by people of color, and we call one of them and then they distribute the word and they’ll lock their doors if we see anyone. Just things like that.

SM: When you say you report it, who do you trust right now to report to?

SR: Our neighbors.

SM: Your neighbors.

SR: We have a Signal group, I’m part of several Signal groups. I will get called. Someone will tell me and be like, “hey, we need a big white guy here right now.” And I will show up. And then when I get there, I see things, I take pictures, I send it to that group and I send it to my group of my immediate block of neighbors. And so then they all know, and then they’ll either go check on the neighbors next door who didn’t respond in the group or will drive to the daycare or whatever is needed to do.

SM: Maybe this is a dumb question, but why do you think they’re saying “we need a big white guy”?

SR: I mean, I’m just as likely to get shot and killed and kidnapped and everything as anybody else at this point. But if they’re trying to push the agenda that these types of people are bad people and whatnot, and if in every camera frame that they have, if there’s someone who looks just like you? That bullshit narrative, it’s harder for them to sell it. If I’m standing there, it’s harder for them to sell it. And I hate it. It sucks on so many levels, obviously.

SM: Can people talk about what they’re doing to push back?

TH: Yeah. I think for me and my teams at Blackbird Revolt and Black Garnet Books, we have these spaces. And so this is something that we didn’t have in 2020. And so being able to activate these spaces, hosting a poster making and community space for folks to come together who do feel similarly and just want to be in space with each other has been really amazing. We are also holding a drive where folks can purchase a book, that’s either in English, Spanish or Somali, that we’re able to deliver to families that don’t feel comfortable leaving their homes.

RD: The people here, we don’t have any faith in the politicians, that they’re going to do anything meaningful or that they have any power at all. We don’t have any faith that the police are going to protect us or that the National Guard is gonna protect us or that Tim Walz or Jacob Frey or any of them are gonna be able to protect us.

SM: Why don’t you feel like you have faith in Jacob Frey? I mean, when I see him on TV and he’s saying “get the hell out,” it seems like he’s giving his best effort, but is that a sentiment that is not felt on this call?

SR: It’s super fucking easy to say “get the fuck out.” We’re all saying that, but all of us are also in the street. All of us are also helping, donating food, donating time. Where the fuck has he been?

TH: I’m seeing the real people who are standing up for these communities out at the protest. I ain’t never once seen that man and that man just stay talking shit and never moves and never has any action behind it. Fuck that man. Fuck all of this whole, “get the fuck out.” Stop, anybody can say a cuss word, but you actually have the power to pass policy and you’re not doing it. So it’s not about not having faith. We have a history of seeing them say shit and then not backing that up with action. So it’s not about faith. We have a historical record of y’all not doing shit for the people.

SM: So let me ask then quickly, what do you want him to do? What could he do that would be meaningful right now if he could actually do, that’s within his power?

JH: If you don’t want to start a constitutional crisis by arresting an ICE officer while he’s doing the awful things that he’s doing, fine, I guess. I would argue differently.

RD: No, that’s not fine. That’s what they should do. That’s what they could do.

JH: Correct.

RD: They could get some fucking balls and call the commanders into their office and say, “Look, are you loyal to the constitution or are you a Nazi that’s gonna fold?”

JH: If these people want to preserve whatever level of normalcy that we know has not existed as Rachel, Terry and Alicia have all described, then citations, parking violations, trespassing violations, these people are using their administrative warrants, that are not admissible to use to enter people’s homes, to enter people’s homes. And they aren’t getting trespassing citations for that. They aren’t getting charged for that, I don’t even think the mayor has talked about the fact that they’re doing that. And these are all things that are actions that can be done instead of tweeting really hard. I want action. I don’t want words. I don’t want you to look like a big tough guy and to get all the people on Twitter or Bluesky or whatever to go, “Oh, he owned him.” I want them gone. I don’t want them here anymore.

SR: He could at the very least talk to us. All he’s doing right now is talking to the media. Talk to us, show up. Maybe he’s doin’ shit behind closed doors. Okay fine, but tell us. Talk to us. Come out, listen. Talk. Be present.

SOREN ASTER: One thing we did at the clay pit as well is I changed it to appointment only. I did as much research as I could on how to keep ICE from coming into the public space of my business, and I found that by making it by appointment only, the whole space becomes private and they cannot come in. So my door stays locked. I let people in as I see fit, but just as another form of precaution, keeping those doors locked. It’s an absolute nightmare.

SM: It literally sounds like it’s created a situation where every move you make is nerve-wracking because of what’s happening.

SA: Absolutely.

SM: I’ve heard many people saying that what’s unfolding in Minneapolis is a queer story. And I find that interesting. And I’m curious, do you guys agree with that?

JH: I want to push back a lot on the idea that this is a very queer thing that’s happening. As a transgender person, I’ve been a community activist for quite a while, especially in 2022 when the federal government, from my perspective, was failing to protect my trans siblings in states like Florida and Texas. There’s a lot of my activism that I do that is directly fueled by my queer identity. My neighbors, my friends, my colleagues, my clients even, are being attacked by a force that is an invasion to our city and our state. And it is on me as a human with human emotions and a personal connection to this place to protect my community, and that’s got nothing to do with me being gay. The motivation is, in this instance, for one of a very rare time in my experience, very disconnected from my queer identity. It’s got more to do with protecting Minnesotans. It’s got more to deal with protecting communities, immigrant communities and communities of color who people who look like me, as we’ve discussed here, famously just don’t even bat an eye at, and it’s wrong.

SA: I don’t think it’s an inherently queer thing, but I think that queer people and Black and Brown people are used to having to rely on our community, rather than our government and other people to get the things that we need and to get the support and to make things happen. We’re used to having to riot, and we’re used to having to scream and try and get people to listen to us and our stories. And so I think when this started. The first people that really knew what to do and how to do it and how to organize are those people. And so I think that it’s one part of the story.

SM: One thing we had mentioned earlier is what happened in Minnesota in 2020. Many have compared what’s happening now to the George Floyd protests of 2020. Um, how do you guys compare it? How is it different? How’s it similar?

AK: The big difference? We knew who the police were, we kind of know who these people are, but we don’t know who those people are. We know that they are some of the same people that were let out of the Jan. 6 stuff because of the pardon. And we know they’re likely a lot of the cops that left the profession because they couldn’t beat up on people so freely in Minneapolis anymore with some of the initiatives that have been trying to change the culture of our police forces.

Editor’s Note: While some government officials, including U.S. Reps. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) and Steve Cohen (D-Tenn.) have called for the DOJ to release information on any participants of the Jan. 6 insurrection employed by ICE, no details have been published. Additionally, several police chiefs and sheriffs have reported that ICE has tried to poach their officers for recruitment, but Uncloseted Media was unable to confirm any cases of this in Minneapolis.

TH: I think for me, I compare it to the longevity of support that’s gonna be happening. I think that after a year, after the protests, after the uprisings, it went back to business as normal, business as usual. I’m also a runner. And so when I’m gonna run a short distance, if I know I’m just trying to get a fast-ass time running a mile, I’m gonna run at that at full velocity. And I feel like people who are just getting activated, that’s what they’re doing. They’re running at it at full velocity and then they get exhausted. Y’all need to run this as if it’s gonna be a 50 mile race. I think for me, how I was activated during the uprisings, I’m really leaning on community. I am texting my group of white allies and being like, “Y’all, I need y’all to pick this up. I need you to help me here, dah dah dah.”

JH: It is unfortunate to me that many people, similar to in 2020 and 2021, will see the immediate aftermath of something and see Derek Chauvin got arrested or whatever it is, and they’re done. And that’s it. And we made the change. And now we can go back. It’s a joke in my community: We can go back to brunch. No we can’t. We’re not done. And they think once ICE is out of Minneapolis and the white people stop dying, then they can just go back to sipping their tea. And I’m worried about that. So it’s a push and pull, and I really want to remain optimistic, and I know there is a future worth fighting for. But I’m also worried that some people will see the short-term victories and give up.

SM: Trump has said that Minnesotan protesters are “left-wing agitators.” I want to know, maybe as a last question, I want to know, how important is protest and what else is getting you through right now?

AK: Well, protest is very important to me, but also understanding the multitude of ways that you can participate in protest. You don’t have to be out necessarily facing off with people that are on an opposing side. You are doing protest by maybe doing a Zoom concert because your concert got canceled and you’re still going to play. Or by delivering food for neighbors and other health and home needs, like laundry detergent is a huge one right now that people need as well as just things like shampoo and soap.

SA: All of the reactions that have happened are really logical when you think about it from an outside perspective. If you take out left and right and the political ideologies of it all, people are coming in and abducting people that are here, mostly not committing crimes. A lot of people, perfectly legal. In any other situation, I think the logical answer would be to fight back and to step up to your community and do what you can to prevent those kidnappings and to prevent that violence from happening.

TH: Protests were so important that it is the first amendment. And so when we get asked things like, “Why are we protesting?” The country was founded on that. I don’t want people to just only relate it to Black people or just to trans people. It was something that was laid at the foundation of this country. We do get to say what we want our government to do and protest is our way of being able to speak out about that. And if you weren’t comfortable with that, you shouldn’t have ran for president.

Continue Reading

Popular