National
Obama campaign courts LGBT support
Donors large and small respond to marriage support

President Obama’s endorsement of marriage rights for same-sex couples has generated a wave of enthusiasm among LGBT people, and while many major donors maxed out their contributions to his campaign prior to the announcement, anecdotal evidence suggests an increase in smaller donations from LGBT supporters who might not be as politically engaged.
Andy Tobias, who’s gay and treasurer of the Democratic National Committee, said supporters had already made significant contributions to the campaign before Obama announced that he had completed his 19-month evolution on same-sex marriage. According to a report in The Advocate, Tobias has raised more than $500,000 as a bundler for the Obama campaign as of late last year.
“Recognizing how much is at stake, the community was already very generous,” Tobias said. “This just added to the enthusiasm.”
Kevin Jennings, who’s gay and formerly headed the Education Department’s Office of Safe and Drug-Free Schools, similarly said he saw only a few new donations after the president’s announcement, noting many Obama supporters had already given all they could. The Advocate report says Jennings raised between $50,000 and $100,000 for the campaign as of late last year.
“Because the president already had a strong record of accomplishment on LGBT issues, many of those who donated in 2008 … had already given (in many cases, the maximum amount) by the time of the president’s announcement,” Jennings said. “But I did see a number of new donors jump in — one who told me he gave online with tears running down his face — as well as folks who had not yet given the maximum, but had given something, add to what they had already given.”
Individuals can donate a maximum of $5,000 to a presidential campaign, which can be split between the primary and the general election. But donors can also contribute $30,800 a year to any given national committee and up to $10,000 a year to the “federal account” of state party committees.
Bruce Bastian, a gay Orem, Utah-based philanthropist known for giving to LGBT causes, said he couldn’t legally donate any more money to the Obama campaign after the president came out in support of same-sex marriage. Bastian was among the attendees at a $35,800-a-plate LGBT fundraiser for Obama that took place in D.C. in February and raised $1.4 million for the president.
“I have already contributed to Obama’s campaign as much as I can,” Bastian said. “I am very excited and pleased that the president came out in clear support of marriage equality for all Americans, but it didn’t change my mind in how I support him or to what extent I will support him. I think it is extremely important for the LGBT community to do everything we can to get Obama re-elected.”
The Obama campaign didn’t respond to a request for comment on how Obama’s support for same-sex marriage affected LGBT donations, but two weeks after the announcement on Wednesday, the campaign unveiled a new initiative, titled “Obama Pride: LGBT Americans for Obama,” which aims to integrate LGBT supporters into the campaign as Pride month approaches.
Obama Pride: LGBT Americans for Obama is set to launch with trainings, phone banks and house parties in a number of states including Pennsylvania, Colorado, Nevada and Michigan — which are seen as battleground states in the general election. As part of the effort, the campaign launched the website lgbt.barackobama.com.
Additionally, the White House is set to host a reception celebrating Pride month on June 15. The Obama administration has held Pride celebrations in each of the previous three years of his term. Obama traditionally speaks to attendees at the event, and will likely capitalize on his announcement in support of marriage equality as he addresses LGBT attendees.
While many major donors may have maxed out their contributions to the Obama campaign, anecdotal evidence suggests that Obama’s announcement in favor of same-sex marriage prompted individuals who tend to make smaller donations to open their wallets.
Tommy Rossman, a gay 39-year-old D.C. resident and human resources management systems coordinator, said he donated $100 to the Obama campaign after the president made the announcement, and had donated $300 to the campaign before Obama came out in support of same-sex marriage.
“Basically, I was just excited that he finally did it, and I wanted to make sure that since he took a risk politically to do it, that I’m doing my part to help him out as well,” Rossman said. “There are so many people — especially with progressives and with gays in general — that have really screamed loudly for him to do it and, again, I just want them to jump on board.”
Dan Ingram, 22, a gay Madison, Wis., health care software specialist, said he donated $30 one week after the announcement because he thought the move was politically courageous in the wake of the passage of a constitutional same-sex marriage ban in North Carolina and the failure of civil unions legislation in Colorado.
“It seems like the politically smart thing to do would have been to stick with his ‘evolution’ thing that he was pitching for a while, which, I think, a lot of liberal people took as code that he’s going to come out for it, but he’s waiting to get re-elected,” Ingram said. “With how those votes went, that might have still been the politically safer bet to make, so, for me, it was a really principled move by him to say that.”
Ingram said he’d donated multiple times to the president’s 2008 campaign, but his donation this month marks the first time he gave to Obama’s re-election bid.
David Wells, a gay 47-year-old D.C. resident and a self-employed software consultant, said he donated $100 to the president about 10 minutes after he endorsed same-sex marriage.
“Over the course of his first term, I kind of felt like he wasn’t doing anything, and lately he’s been coming back around to the LGBT community,” Wells said. “When he finally came out for this, I was like, ‘OK, I’m back in.'”
Other LGBT supporters of Obama have launched larger efforts to encourage other LGBT donors to give to the campaign. Lane Hudson, a gay D.C. Democratic activist, set up a page on the Obama campaign’s website and made an initial contribution of $500. The page had raised $10,000 within 24 hours of the president’s announcement. As of Wednesday, the page had raised $13,088 for the campaign.
“For me, it was a game changer because people like me have spent the last three-and-a-half years — and also the year before during the campaign — to make the case that it was important for our political leaders to court full civil equality,” Hudson said. “That’s what happened when he made this announcement. It really completed an evolution to a position that we need to get all people in all public office to hold.”
CLARIFICATION: The article has been updated to state more clearly that the reason Bruce Bastian couldn’t donate any more to Obama’s campaign is because he’s already reached the legal limit.
New York
Men convicted of murdering two men in NYC gay bar drugging scheme sentenced
One of the victims, John Umberger, was D.C. political consultant

A New York judge on Wednesday sentenced three men convicted of killing a D.C. political consultant and another man who they targeted at gay bars in Manhattan.
NBC New York notes a jury in February convicted Jayqwan Hamilton, Jacob Barroso, and Robert DeMaio of murder, robbery, and conspiracy in relation to druggings and robberies that targeted gay bars in Manhattan from March 2021 to June 2022.
John Umberger, a 33-year-old political consultant from D.C., and Julio Ramirez, a 25-year-old social worker, died. Prosecutors said Hamilton, Barroso, and DeMaio targeted three other men at gay bars.
The jury convicted Hamilton and DeMaio of murdering Umberger. State Supreme Court Judge Felicia Mennin sentenced Hamilton and DeMaio to 40 years to life in prison.
Barroso, who was convicted of killing Ramirez, received a 20 years to life sentence.
National
Medical groups file lawsuit over Trump deletion of health information
Crucial datasets included LGBTQ, HIV resources

Nine private medical and public health advocacy organizations, including two from D.C., filed a lawsuit on May 20 in federal court in Seattle challenging what it calls the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’s illegal deletion of dozens or more of its webpages containing health related information, including HIV information.
The lawsuit, filed in the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington, names as defendants Robert F. Kennedy Jr., secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and HHS itself, and several agencies operating under HHS and its directors, including the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the National Institutes of Health, and the Food and Drug Administration.
“This action challenges the widespread deletion of public health resources from federal agencies,” the lawsuit states. “Dozens (if not more) of taxpayer-funded webpages, databases, and other crucial resources have vanished since January 20, 2025, leaving doctors, nurses, researchers, and the public scrambling for information,” it says.
“These actions have undermined the longstanding, congressionally mandated regime; irreparably harmed Plaintiffs and others who rely on these federal resources; and put the nation’s public health infrastructure in unnecessary jeopardy,” the lawsuit continues.
It adds, “The removal of public health resources was apparently prompted by two recent executive orders – one focused on ‘gender ideology’ and the other targeting diversity, equity, and inclusion (‘DEI’) programs. Defendants implemented these executive orders in a haphazard manner that resulted in the deletion (inadvertent or otherwise) of health-related websites and databases, including information related to pregnancy risks, public health datasets, information about opioid-use disorder, and many other valuable resources.”
The lawsuit does not mention that it was President Donald Trump who issued the two executive orders in question.
A White House spokesperson couldn’t immediately be reached for comment on the lawsuit.
While not mentioning Trump by name, the lawsuit names as defendants in addition to HHS Secretary Robert Kennedy Jr., Matthew Buzzelli, acting director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; Jay Bhattacharya, director of the National Institutes of Health; Martin Makary, commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration; Thomas Engels, administrator of the Health Resources and Services Administration; and Charles Ezell, acting director of the Office of Personnel Management.
The 44-page lawsuit complaint includes an addendum with a chart showing the titles or descriptions of 49 “affected resource” website pages that it says were deleted because of the executive orders. The chart shows that just four of the sites were restored after initially being deleted.
Of the 49 sites, 15 addressed LGBTQ-related health issues and six others addressed HIV issues, according to the chart.
“The unannounced and unprecedented deletion of these federal webpages and datasets came as a shock to the medical and scientific communities, which had come to rely on them to monitor and respond to disease outbreaks, assist physicians and other clinicians in daily care, and inform the public about a wide range of healthcare issues,” the lawsuit states.
“Health professionals, nonprofit organizations, and state and local authorities used the websites and datasets daily in care for their patients, to provide resources to their communities, and promote public health,” it says.
Jose Zuniga, president and CEO of the International Association of Providers of AIDS Care (IAPAC), one of the organizations that signed on as a plaintiff in the lawsuit, said in a statement that the deleted information from the HHS websites “includes essential information about LGBTQ+ health, gender and reproductive rights, clinical trial data, Mpox and other vaccine guidance and HIV prevention resources.”
Zuniga added, “IAPAC champions evidence-based, data-informed HIV responses and we reject ideologically driven efforts that undermine public health and erase marginalized communities.”
Lisa Amore, a spokesperson for Whitman-Walker Health, D.C.’s largest LGBTQ supportive health services provider, also expressed concern about the potential impact of the HHS website deletions.
“As the region’s leader in HIV care and prevention, Whitman-Walker Health relies on scientific data to help us drive our resources and measure our successes,” Amore said in response to a request for comment from the Washington Blade.
“The District of Columbia has made great strides in the fight against HIV,” Amore said. “But the removal of public facing information from the HHS website makes our collective work much harder and will set HIV care and prevention backward,” she said.
The lawsuit calls on the court to issue a declaratory judgement that the “deletion of public health webpages and resources is unlawful and invalid” and to issue a preliminary or permanent injunction ordering government officials named as defendants in the lawsuit “to restore the public health webpages and resources that have been deleted and to maintain their web domains in accordance with their statutory duties.”
It also calls on the court to require defendant government officials to “file a status report with the Court within twenty-four hours of entry of a preliminary injunction, and at regular intervals, thereafter, confirming compliance with these orders.”
The health organizations that joined the lawsuit as plaintiffs include the Washington State Medical Association, Washington State Nurses Association, Washington Chapter of the American Academy of Pediatrics, Academy Health, Association of Nurses in AIDS Care, Fast-Track Cities Institute, International Association of Providers of AIDS Care, National LGBT Cancer Network, and Vermont Medical Society.
The Fast-Track Cities Institute and International Association of Providers of AIDS Care are based in D.C.
U.S. Federal Courts
Federal judge scraps trans-inclusive workplace discrimination protections
Ruling appears to contradict US Supreme Court precedent

Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas has struck down guidelines by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission designed to protect against workplace harassment based on gender identity and sexual orientation.
The EEOC in April 2024 updated its guidelines to comply with the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in Bostock v. Clayton County (2020), which determined that discrimination against transgender people constituted sex-based discrimination as proscribed under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
To ensure compliance with the law, the agency recommended that employers honor their employees’ preferred pronouns while granting them access to bathrooms and allowing them to wear dress code-compliant clothing that aligns with their gender identities.
While the the guidelines are not legally binding, Kacsmaryk ruled that their issuance created “mandatory standards” exceeding the EEOC’s statutory authority that were “inconsistent with the text, history, and tradition of Title VII and recent Supreme Court precedent.”
“Title VII does not require employers or courts to blind themselves to the biological differences between men and women,” he wrote in the opinion.
The case, which was brought by the conservative think tank behind Project 2025, the Heritage Foundation, presents the greatest setback for LGBTQ inclusive workplace protections since President Donald Trump’s issuance of an executive order on the first day of his second term directing U.S. federal agencies to recognize only two genders as determined by birth sex.
Last month, top Democrats from both chambers of Congress reintroduced the Equality Act, which would codify LGBTQ-inclusive protections against discrimination into federal law, covering employment as well as areas like housing and jury service.