News
Court rules against law barring gay couples from veterans benefits
Judge finds U.S. gov’t has no rational basis for withholding benefits from same-sex spouses
Tracey (left) & Maggie Cooper-Harris have sued to received veterans benefits that were denied under Title 38 (Blade file photo by Michael Key).
A federal district judge in California ruled on Thursday that enforcing Title 38 — the portion of U.S. code governing veterans benefits — to bar former troops in same-sex marriages from receiving spousal veterans benefits is unconstitutional.
U.S. District Judge Consuelo Marshall, a Carter appointee, grants summary judgment in favor of lesbian veteran plaintiff Tracey Cooper-Harris by determining the U.S. government lacks any rational basis in withholding these benefits. Marshall finds current law doesn’t advance gender equity or military purposes.
“Title 38 is not rationally related to the military’s commitment to caring for and providing for veterans benefits,” Marshall writes. “[T]he court permanently enjoins Defendants from relying on [Title 38] or Section 3 of [DOMA] to deny recognition of Plantiffs’ marriage recognized by the State of California.”
It wasn’t immediately clear Thursday night whether the ruling means the U.S. government is enjoined from blocking benefits for all gay married veterans or only the plaintiffs who filed suit in the case. However, the court declared the law unconstitutional, not just as applied to the plaintiffs.
Caren Short, staff attorney for the Southern Poverty Law Center, said Friday the decision applies “just to our clients Tracey and Maggie,” but believes the administration can implement the ruling on a nationwide basis.
“We’re hopeful that now that a federal court has declared these definition in Title 38 unconstitutional that the VA will be able take steps toward providing equal benefits now to everyone,” Short said.
Jon Davidson, legal director Lambda Legal, said whether the administration will apply the ruling only to plaintiffs or other gay veterans is yet to be seen.
“In most instances, DOJ takes the position that a district court ruling against a federal agency is not binding on the agency beyond the jurisdiction of the court issuing the ruling, but I do not know what DOJ will say here, if they do not appeal, as they may simply accede to the ruling on a nationwide basis,” Davidson said.
The Justice and Veterans Affairs departments didn’t immediately respond to a request to comment Friday morning on what their next steps will be as a result of the ruling.
The lawsuit, known as Cooper-Harris v. United States, was filed in February 2012 by the Southern Poverty Law Center on behalf of Tracey Cooper-Harris, a lesbian veteran of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars who was seeking veterans spousal benefits for her spouse, Maggie Cooper-Harris. Tracey was diagnosed with multiple sclerosis and later found it was connected to her service, but was unable to receive spousal disability benefits.
The Southern Poverty Law Center asked the court to overturn both Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act, which has since been overturned by the Supreme Court, and Title 38 with respect to its hold on spousal benefits for gay veterans on the basis that the laws violate due process under the Fifth Amendment.
In a statement provided by SPLC, Tracey Cooper-Harris expressed gratitude the court ruled in favor of granting veterans benefits that will benefit her and her spouse.
“Maggie and I have waited so long to receive the same benefits other married veterans and their spouses receive,” Tracey said. “We are overjoyed that the court has ended the federal government’s discrimination against gay and lesbian veterans and their spouses. Judge Marshall’s ruling confirms that the service of gay and lesbian veterans and the sacrifices of their spouses are valued equally in the eyes of the law.”
Even though the U.S. Supreme Court has struck down the Section 3 of DOMA, the U.S. government has still withheld veterans spousal benefits — such as disability and joint burial benefits — from veterans in same-sex marriages on the basis of Title 38. That law, which governs veterans benefits, defines spouse in opposite-sex terms independent of DOMA.
Just this week, the Washington Blade made public a letter from Secretary of Veterans Affairs Eric Shinseki stating that U.S. government is still withholding spousal benefits for veterans marriages. The letter says the department is still reviewing with the Justice Department whether the Obama administration can afford these benefits following the DOMA decision.
Stephen Peters, president of the LGBT group American Military Partners Association, commended the court for reaching the decision that Title 38 is unconstitutional.
“Title 38 clearly violated the constitutional rights of our military veteran families,” Peters said. “This decision sets our nation on a path to honoring and serving all of our veterans and their families, regardless of their sexual orientation.”
Doug NeJaime, who’s gay and law professor at University of California, Irvine, said the ruling is positive, but noted other statutes still exist barring veterans spousal benefits from flowing to same-sex couples.
“The ruling applies the reasoning of Windsor in a logical way and represents an important step forward on veterans benefits,” NeJaime said. “However, veterans benefits have traditionally not used a place of celebration rule, meaning that unlike in the general military context, same-sex couples would not automatically be eligible for benefits based on their marriage.”
It’s unclear how the case could proceed any further to higher court. U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder announced the Justice Department wouldn’t defend Title 38 against legal challenges that contest the law on the basis that it unfairly deprives same-sex couples of veterans benefits. The House Republican-led Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group, which had taken up defense of DOMA after the Obama administration stood down, withdrew as a party from the case in July.
SPLC’s Short she doesn’t believe anyone can appeal the case now that there are no opposing parties in the lawsuit.
“On the issue of Title 38’s constitutionality, it’s doesn’t appear that there will be anyone to appeal,” Short said. “The Department of Justice said that they also agreed that Title 38 is unconstitutional. They filed a brief in support of our motion for summary judgment, so it would be strange for them to appeal the ruling, which was essentially the outcome that they were advocating for. So on the issue of Title 38’s constitutionality, there isn’t likely to be an appeal.”
But Lambda’s Davidson said the Justice Department still may appeal the decision on the grounds that the federal district court in California doesn’t have jurisdiction to hear the case.
“While DOJ is not defending on the merits, it has been contesting whether the Title 38 challenge belongs in federal district court as opposed to the specialized administrative court that deals with VA benefit issues,” Davidson said. “The judge ruled against DOJ on that previously but and DOJ might appeal that issue at this point.”
Rehoboth Beach
Former CAMP Rehoboth official sentenced to nine months in prison
Salvator Seeley pleaded guilty to felony theft charge for embezzlement
Salvator “Sal” Seeley, who served as an official with the Rehoboth Beach, Del., CAMP Rehoboth LGBTQ community center for 20 years, was sentenced on April 5 by a Sussex County Superior Court judge to nine months in prison and to pay $176,000 in restitution to the organization.
The sentencing took place about five weeks after Seeley pleaded guilty to a charge of Theft in Excess of $50,000 for allegedly embezzling funds from CAMP Rehoboth, a spokesperson for the Delaware Department of Justice told the Washington Blade.
Seeley’s guilty plea came shortly after a grand jury, at the request of prosecutors, indicted him on the felony theft charge following an investigation that found he had embezzled at least $176,000 from the nonprofit LGBTQ organization.
“Salvatore C. Seeley, between the 27th day of February 2019 and the 7th day of September 2021, in the County of Sussex, State of Delaware, did take property belonging to CAMP Rehoboth, Inc., consisting of United States currency and other miscellaneous property valued at more than $50,000, intending to appropriate the same,” the indictment states.
“The State recommended a sentence of two years of incarceration based on the large-scale theft and the impact to the non-profit organization,” Delaware Department of Justice spokesperson Caroline Harrison told the Blade in a statement.
“The defense cited Seeley’s lack of a record and gambling addiction in arguing for a probationary sentence,” the statement says. “Seeley was sentenced in Superior Court to a nine-month prison term and to pay a total of $176,000 in restitution for the stolen funds,” Harrison says in the statement.
Neither Seeley nor his attorney could immediately be reached for comment.
At the time of Seeley’s indictment in February, CAMP Rehoboth released a statement saying it first discovered “financial irregularities” within the organization on Sept. 7, 2021, “and took immediate action and notified state authorities.” The statement says this resulted in the investigation of Seeley by the state Department of Justice as well as an internal investigation by CAMP Rehoboth to review its “financial control policies” that led to an updating of those policies.
“As we have communicated from day one, CAMP Rehoboth has fully cooperated with law enforcement,” the statement continues. “At its request, we did not speak publicly about the investigation while it was ongoing for fear it would jeopardize its integrity,” according to the statement. “This was extremely difficult given our commitment to transparency with the community about day-to-day operations during the recent leadership transition.”
The statement was referring to Kim Leisey, who began her job as CAMP Rehoboth’s new executive director in July of 2023, while the Seeley investigation had yet to be completed, following the organization’s process of searching for a new director. It says Seeley left his job as Health and Wellness Director of CAMP Rehoboth in September of 2021 after working for the organization for more than 20 years.
“Mr. Seeley’s actions are a deep betrayal to not only CAMP Rehoboth but also the entire community we serve,” the statement says.
Maryland
Christian Siriano to serve as grand marshal of Annapolis Pride Parade
Fashion designer is an Annapolis native
BY JOHN-JOHN WILLIAMS IV | He’s conquered fashion week. His designs have slayed the red carpet during award season. And now Christian Siriano is coming home.
The Annapolis native will serve as grand marshal and keynote speaker June 1 for the annual Annapolis Pride Parade and Festival, which is a major coup as the event enters its fourth year.
The rest of this article can be read on the Baltimore Banner’s website.
The queer community in Kenya can breathe a sigh of relief after a Mombasa court on Monday ruled clerics, politicians, and anti-LGBTQ groups cannot hold homophobic protests or engage in incitement.
The Mombasa High Court’s ruling, however, is temporary until July 24 when the court in Kenya’s second-largest city determines a petition on the issue.
Two petitioners — Mr. JM and the Center for Minority Rights and Strategic Litigation — last October sued Police Inspector General Japhet Koome for allowing religious leaders and lobby groups to hold homophobic protests whenever a court rules in favor of the LGBTQ community.
The petitioners’ effort to demand a ban on anti-LGBTQ protests in Kenya was in response to a series of homophobic demonstrations, particularly in Mombasa, after the Supreme Court last September affirmed an earlier decision that allowed the National Gay and Lesbian Rights Commission to register as an NGO.
Mombasa High Court Judge Olga Sewe in her Monday ruling also directed the petitioners and the respondents, who include Koome, two anti-LGBTQ activists and a national lobby group dubbed the “Anti-LGBTQ Movement” that organized protests, to file their witness lists and counter statements within 14 days of the July hearing.
“Pending the hearing and determination of this petition, this Honorable Court (does) hereby issue a conservatory order restraining the 2nd and 5th Respondents from calling on or inciting members of the public to carry out extra-judicial killing, lynching, punishing, stoning, forcible conversion, or any other means of harming LGBTQ+ identifying persons and their homes,” Sewe stated.
She also stopped the “Anti-LGBTQ movement,” Koome and any state agency from any attempted “expulsion from Kenya or any party of Kenya of LGBTQ+ identifying persons or closure of organizations serving LGBTQ+ identifying persons.”
The court’s directives come after the Center for Minority Rights and Strategic Litigation led a protest on April 11 against the “anti-LGBTQ Movement”‘s invasion of Mvita Clinic in Mombasa that “hateful misinformation” reportedly sparked because the facility also serves queer people.
“Mvita Clinic, like all healthcare providers, serves the entire community,” CMRSL stated. “Targeting them for LGBTQ+ inclusion is discriminatory and an attack on the basic right to health. Everyone deserves access to healthcare, and we urge an end to the spread of lies. Let’s promote inclusivity and ensure Mvita Clinic remains a safe space for all.”
CMRSL in response to Osewe’s ruling said it was a “major win for safety and equality in Kenya” because it allows the LGBTQ people to live with “greater peace of mind.”
The Initiative for Equality and Non-Discrimination, an LGBTQ rights group, meanwhile lauded the court’s decision as a reprieve to homophobic attacks on the queer community.
“There is some reprieve given the security incidents we witnessed during the protests on Sept. 15 last year,” INEND Communications Officer Melody Njuki told the Washington Blade.
“We had rescued LGBTQ+ folks in Mombasa, Kilifi, and Lamu, due to security incidents caused by the hatred the anti-LGBTQ movement mongered and the calling of violence towards people associated with the queer group and those identifying as members,” she added.
PEMA Kenya, a Mombasa-based gender and sexual minority organization, also applauded the court’s temporary injunction, describing them as timely in protecting the LGBTQ community against all forms of homophobic attacks.
“We welcome the ruling and we believe it will impact our members who for some time felt robbed of the freedom to express themselves,” PEMA Kenya director Ishmael Baraka told the Blade.
The Nature Network, a rights organization for refugees living in Kenya, also welcomed the Monday ruling which it termed “a positive step showing the courts’ commitment to upholding human rights for all.”
“Anti-LGBTQ Movement” Chair Salim Karama, however, declined to respond to the Blade’s questions about the ruling until determination of the petition’s status. He noted the organization is waiting for their lawyer to speak with them about the decision and the filing of counter statements that Sewe ordered.
As LGBTQ rights groups seek the queer community’s protection in Kenyan courts, parliament, on the other hand in is set to consider a petition that notes what it describes as the proliferation of homosexuality in the country.
National Assembly Speaker Moses Wetang’ula on Feb. 27 referred the petition to the relevant parliamentary committee for inquiry after MP Ali Mohamed, a member of the ruling party and a vocal LGBTQ rights opponent, presented it in the National Assembly, the lower house of the Kenyan parliament, on behalf of a group of more than 70 Kenyans and religious organizations opposed to homosexuality.
Former CAMP Rehoboth official sentenced to nine months in prison
Christian Siriano to serve as grand marshal of Annapolis Pride Parade
Kenyan court bars homophobic protests
Pride season has begun
PHOTOS: On assignment in Hungary, Poland, and Germany
Mexican Senate approves bill to ban conversion therapy
Should I divorce my husband for the hot new guy in our building?
Md. governor signs Freedom to Read Act
Successful open relationships take effort
