National
After action on immigration, will Obama move to protect LGBT workers?
White House says no executive order ‘at this time’
President Obama’s action last week protecting many young, undocumented immigrants from deportation has won praise in progressive circles — including among LGBT advocates — but the move raises a question: Can the LGBT community now expect that the previously denied administrative actions they’ve been seeking will come to fruition?
On Friday, the Obama administration announced that an estimated 800,000 young undocumented immigrants who were brought into the United States will be considered for relief from removal from the country if they meet certain criteria. Among the criteria is whether the person in question has a college education or has served in the military. Those criteria would have protected such immigrants from deportation had Congress passed the DREAM Act.
During remarks in the White House Rose Garden, Obama announced the policy change and said it was a means to keep talented people in the United States.
“As I said in my speech on the economy yesterday, it makes no sense to expel talented young people, who, for all intents and purposes, are Americans — they’ve been raised as Americans; understand themselves to be part of this country — to expel these young people who want to staff our labs, or start new businesses, or defend our country simply because of the actions of their parents — or because of the inaction of politicians,” Obama said.
Excitement among immigration rights advocates ensued and hundreds of young people swarmed the White House to rally in support of the president’s action. And this praise was echoed by LGBT rights advocates.
Rea Carey, executive director of the National Gay & Lesbian Task Force, was among those who praised the move.
“We applaud the Obama administration for taking this monumental and inspiring step,” Carey said. “It shows true leadership. It is heartening to know that hundreds of thousands of young people will no longer have to live in daily fear of being forced out of the country, away from the life and dreams they have built.”
But the policy change marks a turnabout for the administration, which had previously stated it wanted legislative action on the DREAM Act as opposed to pursuing executive action.
In September remarks before the Congressional Hispanic Caucus Institute’s annual gala, Obama talked about wanting Congress to take action on the DREAM Act
“I wish I had a magic wand and could make this all happen on my own,” Obama said. “There are times where — until Nancy Pelosi is speaker again — I’d like to work my way around Congress. But the fact is, even as we work towards a day when I can sign an immigration bill, we’ve got laws on the books that have to be upheld.”
To be fair, Obama didn’t completely rule out executive action on the DREAM Act at the gala. Saying “how we enforce those laws is also important,” the president noted the Department of Homeland Security is taking common-sense steps for immigration enforcement.
But the remarks should ring a bell. They’re along the lines of similar talking points that administration officials have expressed in regard to actions sought by the LGBT community. Now that the administration has taken action to help young, undocumented immigrants, will it reconsider its position on those other actions?
Perhaps the most high-profile outstanding request of the administration is an executive order requiring contractors doing business with the federal government to have employment non-discrimination policies inclusive of sexual orientation and gender identity. In April, the White House announced it wouldn’t take such action at this time and was opting instead for a legislative solution.
Felipe Matos, GetEQUAL’s national field director and a gay, undocumented immigrant, said last week following the announcement that he’s happy with Obama’s action, but wants to see more efforts on employment non-discrimination.
“I’m still reeling from the news and overjoyed by the announcement — but my heart has just enough room in it for another executive order,” Matos said. “It’s my hope that President Obama will make today especially historic by signing another executive order — one that will guarantee that I have the right to work freely and openly as an immigrant, but also as a gay American.”
Questions about why Obama chose to take administrative action on the immigration issue and not on the issue of LGBT workplace discrimination were asked even in Republican circles.
Richard Grenell, who’s gay and was briefly a foreign policy spokesperson for the Romney campaign, criticized Obama following the immigration announcement — reiterating a previously stated belief that Obama is playing politics with the LGBT community.
“President Obama obviously made a calculated political move to NOT give an executive order for ENDA,” Grenell said in an email to the Blade. “It’s painfully evident that the president doesn’t think gays are equal, he just thinks they are his solid and sure voting bloc and will treat us in raw political terms. Both parties, sadly, play politics with an issue that is about equality.”
For his part, Romney is facing his own political problems as a result of the DREAM Act administrative action. While taking a hard line on immigration during the Republican primary and saying he’d veto the DREAM Act, Romney has refused to say following Obama’s move whether he’d undo the action if elected president.
Despite these calls, the administration hasn’t changed its line on LGBT employment non-discrimination policy in the wake of the immigration policy.
Shin Inouye, a White House spokesperson, said nothing has changed in the administration’s position, reiterating that the directive won’t happen “at this time.”
“As has been previously stated, while it is not our usual practice to discuss executive orders that may or may not be under consideration, an order on LGBT non-discrimination for federal contractors will not be issued at this time,” Inouye said.
Another request of the administration is meant to protect bi-national same-sex couples from separation. Straight Americans can marry their foreign spouses to protect from deportations, but the same option isn’t available to gay Americans because of DOMA.
LGBT immigration rights groups have been asking the Department of Homeland Security to hold in abeyance the marriage-based green card applications for foreign nationals in same-sex relationships. The administration has said consistently in response to requests for this action that it plans to continue to enforce DOMA while it’s on the books.
Rachel Tiven, executive director of Immigration Equality, called the immigration announcement “great news for our country” and said it would protect gay foreign nationals in same-sex couples if they qualify for relief under the DREAM Act. Still, she called for additional action.
“No person should face forcible separation from their families, regardless of their age,” Tiven said. “That is why the White House should follow today’s announcement with a proposal to extend that same relief to immigrants with U.S.-citizen partners and spouses across the board. Keeping families together is good policy, and all families, including those that are LGBT, should have the support of the president in the form of a similar policy.”
Lavi Soloway, co-founder of Stop the Deportations, said he celebrates the move but wants additional action from the administration for bi-national couples in the wake of decisions from six federal courts finding DOMA unconstitutional.
“Every day these couples worry that they will be torn apart or forced into exile in order to stay together,” Soloway said. “This administration has said that denying green cards to the spouses of gay and lesbian Americans is a violation of the equal protection guarantee of the U.S. Constitution, but has not taken the steps necessary to mitigate the discriminatory impact of DOMA in this area.”
The actions that Soloway is seeking are: ordering an immediate moratorium on deportations of the foreign partners of gay Americans; providing temporary parole to the partners, spouses and children of gay Americans who are stuck outside the United States so that these families can be reunited; and putting on hold all “green card” petitions filed by gay Americans for their spouses.
Peter Boogard, a DHS spokesperson, reiterated that it will continue to enforce DOMA when asked about holding marriage-based green cards in abeyance.
“Pursuant to the attorney general’s guidance, the Defense of Marriage Act remains in effect and the executive branch, including the Department of Homeland Security, will continue to enforce it unless and until Congress repeals it, or there a final judicial determination that it is unconstitutional,” Boogard said.
But recent news may be an indication that the Obama administration is changing its tune. In recent weeks, the Board of Immigration Appeals has rejected the denial of green card petitions issued by U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services in the cases filed by four married, gay couples who live in in Florida, New York, Pennsylvania and Canada.
In all cases, the BIA ordered the USCIS to conduct further inquiry to determine if these marriages are legally valid and whether if not for DOMA, the spouse would qualify for a green card.
In one case, the ruling re-opened removal proceedings for the spouse of a gay American who is facing an outstanding deportation order. According to Soloway, who’s handling the cases, the Board of Immigration Appeals has never before re-opened removal proceedings or remanded green card petitions back to USCIS after denials based solely on DOMA.
The Justice Department didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.
LGBT advocates say they’ll continue to press forward. Speaking with the Washington Blade earlier this week, Chad Griffin, the new president of the Human Rights Campaign, commended Obama for taking action on immigration and said HRC will push forward when asked about these LGBT-related issues.
“HRC has been supportive of the DREAM Act for a long time,” Griffin said. “The president made an important step recently in the last week in what he announced and we have more to accomplish on some things that HRC will continue to voice our concern on.”
Vice President JD Vance and his wife, second lady Usha Vance, will visit Hungary next week.
An announcement the White House released on Thursday said the Vances will be in Budapest, the Hungarian capital, from April 7-8.
JD Vance “will hold bilateral meetings with” Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán. The announcement further indicates the vice president “will also deliver remarks on the rich partnership between the United States and Hungary.”
The Vances will travel to Hungary less than a week before the country’s parliamentary elections take place on April 12.
Orbán, who has been in office since 2010, and his Fidesz-KDNP coalition government have faced widespread criticism over its anti-LGBTQ crackdown.
The Associated Press notes polls indicate Orbán is trailing Péter Magyar and his center-right Tisza party.
President Donald Trump removed Attorney General Pam Bondi from her post Thursday, following growing criticism over how she and the Department of Justice handled a range of issues, including matters related to sex offender and Trump ally Jeffrey Epstein.
Trump announced Bondi’s removal on Truth Social, where he also said Todd Blanche will serve as acting head of the Justice Department.
“Pam Bondi is a great American patriot and a loyal friend, who faithfully served as my attorney general over the past year,” Trump wrote on the platform. “Pam did a tremendous job overseeing a massive crackdown on crime across our country, with murders plummeting to their lowest level since 1900.”
Trump was seen as recently as Wednesday with the now-former attorney general at a Supreme Court hearing on citizenship.
The decision contrasts with Trump’s previous public praise of Bondi, the 87th U.S. attorney general and former 37th attorney general of Florida, who served in that role from 2011-2019 before joining the Trump-Vance administration. He has frequently lauded her loyalty and said he speaks with her often. Bondi was also one of president’s defense lawyers during his first impeachment trial.
Privately, however, Trump had grown frustrated that Bondi was not “moving quickly enough” to prosecute critics and political adversaries he wanted to face criminal charges, according to multiple sources. The New York Times reported that her inability to charge former FBI Director James B. Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James with any crimes is a large factor in the president’s choice to fire her from the government’s primary law enforcement agency.
The move comes as Trump has sought to minimize public turmoil within his administration, avoiding the perception of a revolving-door Cabinet that defined his first term.
Lee Zeldin, a former Republican congressman from New York who unsuccessfully ran for governor, has emerged as a leading contender to lead the Justice Department. He has been one of Trump’s most reliable allies.
“He’s our secret weapon,” Trump said of Zeldin in February during a White House event promoting the coal industry, adding, “He’s getting those approvals done in record-setting time.”
Bondi has also growing faced scrutiny from Congress.
The House Oversight Committee recently subpoenaed her to testify about the department’s handling of certain files, where she declined to answer key questions during a contentious House Judiciary Committee hearing in February.
The Tampa native has a long history of opposing LGBTQ rights through her roles in government. As Florida attorney general, she fought against the legalization of same-sex marriage, arguing it would cause “serious public harm,” pushing forward a legal battle that cost taxpayers nearly half a million dollars. She also asked the Florida Supreme Court to overturn a lower court ruling that found the state’s same-sex marriage ban unconstitutional.
More recently, Bondi established a “Title IX Special Investigations Team” within the Justice Department focused on restricting transgender women and girls from participating in women’s and girls’ sports teams and accessing facilities aligned with their gender identity. She also told Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia to turn over the medical records of anyone under 19 who received gender-affirming care.
Her removal follows Trump’s decision last month to oust another controversial female Cabinet figure, Kristi Noem.
The White House
VIDEO: Gay journalist detained for booing Trumps at ‘Chicago’ opening night
Eugene Ramirez booed first family at Kennedy Center
President Donald Trump and first lady Melania Trump attended the opening night of “Chicago” at the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts on Tuesday. They were greeted by a mix of cheers, applause, and some audible boos.
Among them was Eugene Ramirez, a gay Washington resident, who later shared his account of the night after being briefly detained by security for booing the president and giving a thumbs-down gesture — an expression of what many would call a textbook definition of constitutionally protected speech to criticize the government.
Ramirez attended the opening night performance with a group of friends, hoping to catch a final show before the center undergoes two years of major changes under Trump oversight. The musical, based on a 1926 play of the same name, has become synonymous with Broadway success.
With music by John Kander, lyrics by Fred Ebb, and a book by Ebb and Bob Fosse, “Chicago” has cemented itself as a cultural staple — known for its signature Fosse choreography, stripped-down staging, and sleek, campy aesthetic. The story follows Roxie Hart and Velma Kelly, women who murder their husbands but — with the help of the manipulative, charismatic, and narcissistic attorney Billy Flynn — walk away scot-free.
It remains the longest-running American musical in Broadway history, and its 2002 film adaptation famously won the Academy Award for Best Picture. On this night, however, the production also became the backdrop for a very modern moment of political protest.
“I accompanied five friends to opening night of ‘Chicago’, as a way to enjoy a final performance in the Kennedy Center as we know it,” Ramirez began to recount to the Washington Blade, describing the moment his group settled into their seats inside the ornate Opera House theater.
Just before the performance began, the twice impeached president and first lady appeared in the balcony box, drawing immediate attention from the audience below. Theatergoers stood, cheered, clapped, and waved, while Ramirez made a different choice.
While accounts of the crowd’s reaction have varied, Ramirez said his response was intentional, immediate, and within his rights. Moments after booing and giving a thumbs-down while recording on his iPhone, security intervened.
The video of Ramirez booing the Trump’s is here:
“Within moments, the director [of security] and another guard approached and escorted me to a side area where several other security guards were waiting,” he said. “I was detained until everyone was seated and the lights dimmed.”
As he was escorted away, Ramirez said his instincts as a journalist kicked in. A former lead anchor for Sinclair’s national evening news broadcast, he said the situation immediately felt off — or more aptly put — as if he could see the strings being pulled from someone attempting to control the narrative.
“Journalism is a vocation, not just a job. I immediately knew there wasn’t just an uncomfortable interaction with security,” he said. “The Kennedy Center is a federally funded cultural institution, and being questioned about speech related to the president in that setting felt like something the public should know about.”
Ramirez explained the difference between a standard visit by a public official and this performance: the president’s appearance wasn’t just ceremonial; it was very clearly a media moment.
“The White House press pool was there, and it was clear this was an effort to manage the president’s image in the media,” Ramirez continued. “The irony was not lost on me that this was happening on opening night of ‘Chicago’, a musical about manipulating the press to shape public perception.”
According to Ramirez, the explanation he received from Kennedy Center Director of Safety and Security Karles C. Jackson Sr., was brief, but illuminating.
“He said, ‘they don’t want booing,’ and even called out my thumbs-down gesture. He never clarified who ‘they’ were, but whether it was the administration or the Kennedy Center, the distinction felt meaningless,” he explained. “Mr. Jackson ultimately told me he was just trying to do his job, shook my hand, and allowed me to return to my seat once the lights dimmed and the overture started playing.”
Ramirez said he didn’t blame the guard individually, noting the broader context of the Kennedy Center’s uncertain future and the pressures staff were under.
“With the center closing in the coming months, some of these security guards being pressured to restrict our freedom of speech may only have a few weeks of work left.”
He believes the decision to remove him was driven less by disruption than optics, particularly given the presence of the press.
“It was very clearly about protection — whether protecting the president from visible dissent, or his image before the media present. There was no disruption as almost everyone was standing and reacting loudly to the arrival of the president and first lady, with cheers, applause, and hand gestures. The difference was that my reaction, unlike most, was negative.”
Drawing on his experience covering public officials, Ramirez said the incident felt more about controlling perception than security.
“Usually, law enforcement may monitor or intervene if there’s a disruption, but here there was no disruption at all. Simply expressing dissent in a public, cultural space drew the attention of security. It made it feel less like a matter of decorum and more like an effort to control the narrative around the president,” he said. “It’s about what happens when dissent is treated as disruption rather than a right.”
“The show hadn’t started. I threatened no one. Billy Flynn would have approved of the optics. The rest of us should be paying attention.”
Ramirez framed the incident as part of a broader constitutional concern, one that is plaguing the Trump-Vance administration as they continue to reject rules and normalcy set forth by other reserved presidents.
“Being singled out by security at a federally funded institution for expressing dissent shouldn’t be brushed off; it undermines the First Amendment,” he said, looking at it slightly distanced from it now. “Being of Cuban heritage, and a journalist, it’s a right I’m not willing to give up readily.”
“Publicly funded cultural institutions should allow visible dissent, even in politically charged moments,” he added. “Of course, I understand the need to manage disruptions during a performance, but that was not the case here.”
The themes of “Chicago”, a long-running satire about media manipulation and public perception, added another layer of irony to the experience, Ramirez explained.
“The satire truly leapt off the stage! A show about controlling the narrative, manipulating the press, and covering up truths by leaning on showmanship and distractions. The show is decades old, but could’ve been written today. We’re being razzle-dazzled daily and it’s getting harder to tell fact from fiction, no matter where you get your news.”
He, being gay, also acknowledged how hard it must have been for the performers on stage, assuming that at least some in the cast were also members of the LGBTQ community — and artists — two things Trump doesn’t always get along with.
“It was not lost on me that many of the actors on that stage, that the president and first lady presumably applauded, are members of the LGBTQ community which this administration has rolled back protections for under the guise of religious liberty and free speech, resulting in blatant discrimination.”
He pointed to a particular number that felt surreal given the circumstances.
“Its ‘Razzle Dazzle’ number celebrates keeping audiences off balance; at its climax, a massive American flag descends as the song celebrates blinding audiences to what is real. Watching that scene after being detained for a thumbs-down was surreal.”
Ramirez said the show’s closing lines were especially sharp given the presidential audience and what he just experienced.
“At the end of the show,
Velma says: ‘You know, a lot of people have lost faith in America.’
Roxie replies: ‘And for what America stands for.’
Velma: ‘But we are the living examples of what a wonderful country this is.’
Roxie: ‘So we’d just like to say thank you and God bless you.’
They had both just gotten away with murder!”
His closing lines, however, were a bit more pointed than “scintillating sinners” Roxie Hart and Velma Kelly’s were in the show.
“Democracy only works when citizens are allowed to boo,” he said. “Tuesday night at the Kennedy Center, ‘Chicago’ made that point better than I ever could.”
The Blade reached out to the Kennedy Center but did not receive a comment back.
JD Vance to travel to Hungary next week
Pam Bondi ousted as attorney general
VIDEO: Gay journalist detained for booing Trumps at ‘Chicago’ opening night
Idaho Gov. signs harshest anti-trans bathroom bill in the country
Award-winning D.C. chef reaching new culinary heights
‘Out for McDuffie’ event held at D.C. gay bar
‘Jonah’ an undeniably compelling but unusual memory play
The Oscar-losing performance that’s too good to miss
Thousands attend ‘No Kings’ protests in D.C.
