News
High hopes as Obama prepares to meet with Russian gay activists
Many hope president will draw attention to country’s anti-gay propaganda law
President Obama is set to meet with LGBT groups in Russia on Friday. (Washington Blade file photo by Michael Key).
President Obama is set to meet with a group of human rights advocates in Russia on Friday, including representatives of LGBT rights groups and many observers are hopeful that he will take the opportunity to express continued opposition to the country’s controversial anti-gay propaganda law.
During a stopover in Stockholm on Wednesday, Obama expressed solidarity with Sweden during opening remarks at a news conference by saying both the Nordic country and the United States have a shared belief in equality under the law, including for gay citizens.
“We share a belief in the dignity and equality of every human being; that our daughters deserve the same opportunities as our sons; that our gay and lesbian brothers and sisters must be treated equally under the law; that our societies are strengthened and not weakened by diversity,” Obama said.
Obama restated his support for LGBT equality as he prepared to meet with Russian human rights groups and LGBT groups during his visit to St. Petersburg for the annual G-20 summit.
A White House official told the Washington Blade that Obama intends to meet with “civil society representatives” during his trip on Friday and LGBT groups were invited to the meeting.
“The president will meet with Russian civil society leaders to discuss the important role civil society plays in promoting human rights and tolerance,” the official said. “Invited are representatives from groups supporting human rights, the environment, free media, and LGBT rights, among others.”
Obama meets with these activists — as well as leaders from G-20 countries — at a time when he’s pushing for military engagement in Syria over the use of the chemical weapons in the country. That issue will likely play a large role in the discussions — at least with leaders from G-20 nations.
But LGBT advocates who work on international issues told the Washington Blade the meeting with human rights activists provides a stage to draw attention to the condition of human rights in Russia, including the situation for LGBT people.
Innokenty “Kes” Grekov, an associate with the international group Human Rights First who covers Russia, said the administration initiated the meeting under pressure from U.S. groups.
“I think the president will articulate his Russia policy to the activists and express solidarity and gratitude for their work, once again affirming that Russia’s international human rights obligation, and its own constitution, must be protected and democracy advanced,” Grekov said.
Grekov predicted that Russian gay rights activists wouldn’t bring up anything in the meeting that they wouldn’t bring up in a meeting with their own President Vladimir Putin. Further, Grekov said he thinks they’ll tell Obama to resist calls to boycott the 2014 Olympics in Sochi — an idea that he already says he opposes.
“The activists scheduled to meet with Obama work on different issues, and gay rights will be discussed in the context of a wider human rights backslide in Russia,” Grekov added.
Mark Bromley, chair of the Council for Global Equality, said Obama’s meeting with gay rights activists is a monumental development and a potential instrument for change.
“It sends a message of solidarity, and I think it provides an opportunity for the president to connect directly with activists and the issues,” Bromley said. “He did that very effectively on the last trip to Africa, I thought, where he really spoke in a very personal, humble, firm way about these issues being serious human rights concerns.”
Grekov said Obama addressed a group of civil society representatives during a previous trip to Russia in 2009 while in Moscow for a bilateral summit. While some of those groups may have been working on gay issues as part of a larger portfolio, Grekov said he doesn’t remember any “LGBT-only” group taking part in the discussion.
Activists say the meeting is also an opportunity for Obama to step up U.S. opposition to Russia’s anti-gay propaganda law, which bans pro-gay propaganda to minors. The president already expressed opposition to the measure during a news conference in August when he said no one is “more than offended than me” over it.
Bromley said he hopes Obama will speak in Russia about the law “in a rather direct way” to highlight that the law actually harms the children that it intends to protect.
“The law was passed ostensibly to protect children,” Bromley said. “We know from recent evidence here in the United States and around the world that children are actually harmed by these sorts of laws, that they encourage bullying, they encourage some of the taunting and humiliation that leads to violence and suicide. I hope that he would speak directly to the fact that these laws are not the way to protect children.”
Grekov expressed a similar sentiment in terms of asking Obama to continue engaging with Russia, while being more vocal about the anti-gay law as well as issues facing LGBT advocates in Russia.
“He’s taking a stance by meeting with civil society and expressing solidarity, we’d like him to carry that message to the Russian president and the Russian media, too,” Grekov said. “Because the law has provisions affecting foreigners, President Obama and the State Department need to press the Russian authorities to clarify what they mean by ‘propaganda,’ because without understanding of the law it will be impossible for foreign visitors to ‘obey the law.'”
Obama is set to engage with human rights activists in Russia after the group Human Rights First published a report last week documenting abuses under the Russia LGBT law, titled “Convenient Targets,” that calls on the Obama administration to take more action.
Among the potential actions cited in the report are meeting with human rights activists, as Obama is set to do. Additionally, the report calls on the administration to direct the State Department to seek clarification on the anti-“propaganda” law because of its vague wording; lead a multilateral coalition to oppose discrimination and violence against LGBT people; and call for leadership from the U.S. Olympic Committee in opposing the law.
Putin denies Russia has anti-gay law
The anonymous White House official also said while there is currently no plan for a formal bilateral meeting with President Putin of Russia, the administration expects the two presidents to have an opportunity to speak in between meetings of the G-20. Last month, Obama cancelled a formal bilateral meeting planned with Putin, in part, as an administration official said, because of the anti-LGBT environment in Russia.
In an extensive interview published by the Associated Press on Wednesday, Putin said he has no problem with Obama meeting with human rights leaders and acknowledged it was part of U.S. diplomatic policy.
“On the contrary, we welcome it, so that there will be full understanding of whatever’s going on in our society, Putin was quoted as saying. “Of course it would be very good if the diplomatic service, the embassy, the special services, gave a full and objective picture of the state of Russian society, and not just look at it from one angle.”
Putin also said he doesn’t think the law will play a negative role during the upcoming Olympics as he denied that Russia has such a law “targeting people of nontraditional sexual orientation.”
“So you just said that, and you’ve created illusions among millions of viewers that we have these laws,” Putin said. “In Russia there are no such laws. In Russia there is a law forbidding propaganda of nontraditional sexual orientation among minors. That’s a totally different thing.”
The Russian president reportedly said that gay people in Russia have equal access to the workplace and their achievements are rewarded by the government with “prizes, medals, decorations.”
Putin further is quoted as saying the United States has its own work to do in advancing gay rights, saying being gay is a crime in some parts of the country, so the United States isn’t in a position to criticize other countries.
“You are aware, for example, that in several states, nontraditional sexual orientation is still considered a crime,” Putin reportedly said. “In particular, Oklahoma and Texas, I was told — maybe the people who told me that were wrong, but you check. And if that’s actually true, then it’s very strange that those who are trying to teach us aren’t an example worthy of imitation. And several NGOs have presented statistics that affirm that in certain American firms, people of nontraditional sexual orientation are discriminated against in terms of wages.”
No laws in Oklahoma or Texas criminalize homosexuality, although those states do have laws prohibiting recognition of same-sex marriage. Any state law prohibiting same-sex relations in those states would have been struck down by the 2003 U.S. Supreme Court decision in Lawrence v. Texas.
Grekov said in a statement following the interview that Putin is right that gay people enjoy the same rights and economic opportunities as everyone else, but maintained there are still problems.
“What Putin didn’t say is that Russia’s constitutional protections from discrimination for all have not translated in the day-to-day lives of Russia’s LGBT community, which continues to face intolerance and whose freedoms can be undermined through the recently adopted ‘propaganda’ law,” Grekov said.
Ecuador
Justicia reconoce delito de odio en caso de bullying en Instituto Nacional Mejía de Ecuador
Johana B se suicidó el 11 de abril de 2023
A casi tres años del suicidio de Johana B., quien estudió en el Instituto Nacional Mejía, colegio emblemático de Quito, el Tribunal de la Corte Nacional de Justicia ratificó la condena para el alumno responsable del acoso escolar que la llevó a quitarse la vida.
Según información de la Fiscalía, el fallo de última instancia deja en firme la condena de cuatro años de internamiento en un centro para adolescentes infractores, en una audiencia de casación pedida por la defensa del agresor, tres meses antes de que prescriba el caso.
Con la sentencia, este caso es uno de los primeros en el país en reconocer actos de odio por violencia de género, delito tipificado en el artículo 177 del Código Orgánico Penal Integral (COIP).
El suicidio de Johana B. ocurrió el 11 abril de 2023 y fue consecuencia del acoso escolar por estereotipos de género que enfrentó la estudiante por parte de su agresor, quien constantemente la insultaba y agredía por su forma de vestir, llevar el cabello corto o practicar actividades que hace años se consideraban exclusivamente para hombres, como ser mando de la Banda de Paz en el Instituto Nacional Mejía.
Desde la muerte de Johana, su familia buscaba justicia. Su padre, José, en una entrevista concedida a edición cientonce para la investigación periodística Los suicidios que quedan en el clóset a causa de la omisión estatal afirmó que su hija era acosada por su compañero y otres estudiantes con apodos como “marimacha”, lo que también fue corroborado en los testimonios recogidos por la Unidad de Justicia Juvenil No. 4 de la Fiscalía.
Los resultados de la autopsia psicológica y del examen antropológico realizados tras la muerte de Johana confirmaron las versiones de sus compañeras y docentes: que su agresor la acosó de manera sistemática durante dos años. Los empujones, jalones de cabello o burlas, incluso por su situación económica, eran constantes en el aula de clase.
La violencia que recibió Johana escaló cuando su compañero le dio un codazo en la espalda ocasionándole una lesión que le imposibilitó caminar y asistir a clases.
Días después del hecho, la adolescente se quitó la vida en su casa, tras escuchar que la madre del agresor se negó a pagar la mitad del valor de una tomografía para determinar la lesión en su espalda, tal como lo había acordado previamente con sus padres y frente al personal del DECE (Departamento de Consejería Estudiantil del colegio), según versiones de su familia y la Fiscalía.
#AFONDO | Johana se suicidó el 11 de abril de 2023, tras ser víctima de acoso escolar por no cumplir con estereotipos femeninos 😢.
Dos semanas antes, uno de sus compañeros le dio un codazo en la espalda, ocasionándole una lesión que le imposibilitó caminar 🧵 pic.twitter.com/bXKUs9YYOm
— EdicionCientonce (@EdCientonce) September 3, 2025
“Era una chica linda, fuerte, alegre. Siempre nos llevamos muy bien, hemos compartido todo. Nos dejó muchos recuerdos y todos nos sentimos tristes; siempre estamos pensando en ella. Es un vacío tan grande aquí, en este lugar”, expresó José a Edición Cientonce el año pasado.
Para la fiscal del caso y de la Unidad de Justicia Juvenil de la Fiscalía, Martha Reino, el suicidio de la adolescente fue un agravante que se contempló durante la audiencia de juzgamiento de marzo de 2024, según explicó a este medio el año pasado. Desde entonces, la familia del agresor presentó un recurso de casación en la Corte Nacional de Justicia, que provocó la dilatación del proceso.
En el fallo de última instancia, el Tribunal también dispuso que el agresor pague $3.000 a la familia de Johana B. como reparación integral. Además, el adolescente deberá recibir medidas socioeducativas, de acuerdo al artículo 385 del Código Orgánico de la Niñez y Adolescencia, señala la Fiscalía.
El caso de Johana también destapó las omisiones y negligencias del personal del DECE y docentes del Instituto Nacional Mejía. En la etapa de instrucción fiscal se comprobó que no se aplicaron los protocolos respectivos para proteger a la víctima.
De hecho, la Fiscalía conoció el caso a raíz de la denuncia que presentó su padre, José, y no por el DECE, aseguró la fiscal el año pasado a Edición Cientonce.
Pese a estas omisiones presentadas en el proceso, el fallo de última instancia sólo ratificó la condena para el estudiante.
U.S. Military/Pentagon
4th Circuit rules against discharged service members with HIV
Judges overturned lower court ruling
A federal appeals court on Wednesday reversed a lower court ruling that struck down the Pentagon’s ban on people with HIV enlisting in the military.
The conservative three-judge panel on the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals overturned a 2024 ruling that had declared the Defense Department and Army policies barring all people living with HIV from military service unconstitutional.
The 4th Circuit, which covers Maryland, North Carolina, South Carolina, Virginia, and West Virginia, held that the military has a “rational basis” for maintaining medical standards that categorically exclude people living with HIV from enlisting, even those with undetectable viral loads — meaning their viral levels are so low that they cannot transmit the virus and can perform all duties without health limitations.
This decision could have implications for other federal circuits dealing with HIV discrimination cases, as well as for nationwide military policy.
The case, Wilkins v. Hegseth, was filed in November 2022 by Lambda Legal and other HIV advocacy groups on behalf of three individual plaintiffs who could not enlist or re-enlist based on their HIV status, as well as the organizational plaintiff Minority Veterans of America.
The plaintiffs include a transgender woman who was honorably discharged from the Army for being HIV-positive, a gay man who was in the Georgia National Guard but cannot join the Army, and a cisgender woman who cannot enlist in the Army because she has HIV, along with the advocacy organization Minority Veterans of America.
Isaiah Wilkins, the gay man, was separated from the Army Reserves and disenrolled from the U.S. Military Academy Preparatory School after testing positive for HIV. His legal counsel argued that the military’s policy violates his equal protection rights under the Fifth Amendment’s Due Process Clause.
In August 2024, a U.S. District Court sided with Wilkins, forcing the military to remove the policy barring all people living with HIV from joining the U.S. Armed Services. The court cited that this policy — and ones like it that discriminate based on HIV status — are “irrational, arbitrary, and capricious” and “contribute to the ongoing stigma surrounding HIV-positive individuals while actively hampering the military’s own recruitment goals.”
The Pentagon appealed the decision, seeking to reinstate the ban, and succeeded with Wednesday’s court ruling.
Judge Paul V. Niemeyer, one of the three-judge panel nominated to the 4th Circuit by President George H. W. Bush, wrote in his judicial opinion that the military is “a specialized society separate from civilian society,” and that the military’s “professional judgments in this case [are] reasonably related to its military mission,” and thus “we conclude that the plaintiffs’ claims fail as a matter of law.”
“We are deeply disappointed that the 4th Circuit has chosen to uphold discrimination over medical reality,” said Gregory Nevins, senior counsel and employment fairness project director for Lambda Legal. “Modern science has unequivocally shown that HIV is a chronic, treatable condition. People with undetectable viral loads can deploy anywhere, perform all duties without limitation, and pose no transmission risk to others. This ruling ignores decades of medical advancement and the proven ability of people living with HIV to serve with distinction.”
“As both the 4th Circuit and the district court previously held, deference to the military does not extend to irrational decision-making,” said Scott Schoettes, who argued the case on appeal. “Today, servicemembers living with HIV are performing all kinds of roles in the military and are fully deployable into combat. Denying others the opportunity to join their ranks is just as irrational as the military’s former policy.”
New York
Lawsuit to restore Stonewall Pride flag filed
Lambda Legal, Washington Litigation Group brought case in federal court
Lambda Legal and Washington Litigation Group filed a lawsuit on Tuesday, challenging the Trump-Vance administration’s removal of the Pride flag from the Stonewall National Monument in New York earlier this month.
The suit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, asks the court to rule the removal of the Pride flag at the Stonewall National Monument is unconstitutional under the Administrative Procedures Act — and demands it be restored.
The National Park Service issued a memorandum on Jan. 21 restricting the flags that are allowed to fly at National Parks. The directive was signed by Trump-appointed National Park Service Acting Director Jessica Bowron.
“Current Department of the Interior policy provides that the National Park Service may only fly the U.S. flag, Department of the Interior flags, and the Prisoner of War/Missing in Action flag on flagpoles and public display points,” the letter from the National Park Service reads. “The policy allows limited exceptions, permitting non-agency flags when they serve an official purpose.”
That “official purpose” is the grounds on which Lambda Legal and the Washington Litigation Group are hoping a judge will agree with them — that the Pride flag at the Stonewall National Monument, the birthplace of LGBTQ rights movement in the U.S., is justified to fly there.
The plaintiffs include the Gilbert Baker Foundation, Charles Beal, Village Preservation, and Equality New York.
The defendants include Interior Secretary Doug Burgum; Bowron; and Amy Sebring, the Superintendent of Manhattan Sites for the National Park Service.
“The government’s decision is deeply disturbing and is just the latest example of the Trump administration targeting the LGBTQ+ community. The Park Service’s policies permit flying flags that provide historical context at monuments,” said Alexander Kristofcak, a lawyer with the Washington Litigation Group, which is lead counsel for plaintiffs. “That is precisely what the Pride flag does. It provides important context for a monument that honors a watershed moment in LGBTQ+ history. At best, the government misread its regulations. At worst, the government singled out the LGBTQ+ community. Either way, its actions are unlawful.”
“Stonewall is the birthplace of the modern LGBTQ+ rights movement,” said Beal, the president of the Gilbert Baker Foundation. The foundation’s mission is to protect and extend the legacy of Gilbert Baker, the creator of the Pride flag.
“The Pride flag is recognized globally as a symbol of hope and liberation for the LGBTQ+ community, whose efforts and resistance define this monument. Removing it would, in fact, erase its history and the voices Stonewall honors,” Beal added.
The APA was first enacted in 1946 following President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s creation of multiple new government agencies under the New Deal. As these agencies began to find their footing, Congress grew increasingly worried that the expanding powers these autonomous federal agencies possessed might grow too large without regulation.
The 79th Congress passed legislation to minimize the scope of these new agencies — and to give them guardrails for their work. In the APA, there are four outlined goals: 1) to require agencies to keep the public informed of their organization, procedures, and rules; 2) to provide for public participation in the rule-making process, for instance through public commenting; 3) to establish uniform standards for the conduct of formal rule-making and adjudication; and 4) to define the scope of judicial review.
In layman’s terms, the APA was designed “to avoid dictatorship and central planning,” as George Shepherd wrote in the Northwestern Law Review in 1996, explaining its function.
Lambda Legal and the Washington Litigation Group are arguing that not only is the flag justified to fly at the Stonewall National Monument, making the directive obsolete, but also that the National Park Service violated the APA by bypassing the second element outlined in the law.
“The Pride flag at the Stonewall National Monument honors the history of the fight for LGBTQ+ liberation. It is an integral part of the story this site was created to tell,” said Lambda Legal Chief Legal Advocacy Officer Douglas F. Curtis in a statement. “Its removal continues the Trump administration’s disregard for what the law actually requires in their endless campaign to target our community for erasure and we will not let it stand.”
The Washington Blade reached out to the NPS for comment, and received no response.
US wins Olympic gold medal in women’s hockey
Justicia reconoce delito de odio en caso de bullying en Instituto Nacional Mejía de Ecuador
Radical reframing highlights the ‘Wuthering’ highs and lows of a classic
4th Circuit rules against discharged service members with HIV
PHOTOS: Clash
‘Heated Rivalry’ fandom exposes LGBTQ divide in Baltimore
Home is where the heart is
Deon Jones speaks about D.C. Department of Corrections bias lawsuit settlement
European Parliament resolution backs ‘full recognition of trans women as women’
LGBTQ groups question US health agreements with African countries
-
Baltimore4 days ago‘Heated Rivalry’ fandom exposes LGBTQ divide in Baltimore
-
Real Estate4 days ago
Home is where the heart is
-
District of Columbia4 days ago
Deon Jones speaks about D.C. Department of Corrections bias lawsuit settlement
-
European Union4 days ago
European Parliament resolution backs ‘full recognition of trans women as women’
