Local
D.C. Council candidates court LGBT voters
Graham, Bonds face opposition in April primary
Council members Jim Graham and Anita Bonds are seeking re-election and facing Democratic opposition in the April primary. (Washington Blade file photos by Michael Key)
LGBT voters could play a key role in determining the nominees for at least three of the six D.C. Council seats up for grabs in the city’s April 1 Democratic primary, according to activists familiar with the candidates.
Similar to past years, nearly all of the candidates who are favored to win or who have a shot at winning their primary contests and the general election in November are strong supporters of LGBT rights.
In the April primary, D.C. Council Chair Phil Mendelson (D-At-Large), Council member Mary Cheh(D-Ward 3), and Council member Kenyan McDuffie (D-Ward 5) are considered strong favorites to win in the primary and general election. Cheh is running unopposed in the primary.
Mendelson and Cheh are longtime supporters of the LGBT community and McDuffie has been supportive on LGBT issues since winning his seat in a special election in 2012.
Council member Anita Bonds (D-At-Large) and four-term Council member Jim Graham (D-Ward 1), who’s gay, are running in competitive races in the primary, in the opinion of some political observers, although most knowledgeable observers consider them the clear front-runners.
Bonds, who has been involved in D.C. politics since the early 1980s, has a long record of support for LGBT rights. And Graham, the former head of the Whitman-Walker Clinic, has been among the Council’s strongest advocates on LGBT and AIDS issues during his more than 15 years as a Council member.
The remaining Council race on the primary ballot will be for an open seat in Ward 6, which is being vacated by Council member Tommy Wells, a Democrat who’s running for mayor. Three Democratic candidates running in the primary – Charles Allen, Wells’ former chief of staff; Darrel Thompson, and Shelonda Tillman – have expressed strong support on LGBT issues and are expected to compete for support from the large number of LGBT residents that live in Ward 6.
Graham’s longstanding reputation as a champion for his Ward 1 constituents — both gay and straight — would normally make him a shoo-in for winning election to a fifth term. But an 11-2 vote by his Council colleagues last spring to reprimand him on grounds that he violated the Council’s ethics rules in 2008 by improperly interfering with negotiations over a Metro development contract have raised questions over whether his support in the ward has eroded.
The Council’s vote to reprimand Graham came shortly after the city’s independent ethics board, headed by gay former D.C. Attorney General Robert Spagnoletti, issued an opinion saying Graham did not violate any laws but committed an ethical breach as a city official by intervening in the contract process.
Graham has disputed the claim that he did anything improper, saying he pushed for awarding the contract to one developer over another because the one he favored was better qualified to do the work on a project located in his ward.
Lesbian Democratic activist Barbara Helmick, a longtime resident of Ward 1, said she has voted for Graham in the past but is undecided on whether to vote for him this time.
“Certainly the ethics question has raised eyebrows,” Helmick said. “But Jim has done a lot as a Council member and he has basically done a good job for his constituents.”
Helmick, like other Ward 1 residents, said she’s looking at Graham’s two remaining opponents in the primary, civic activists Bryan Weaver and Brianne Nadeau. Both have been strong supporters of the LGBT community. A third opponent, Beverly Wheeler, a former aide to Council Chair Mendelson, dropped out of the race last week, citing family related issues.
Ward 1 is believed to have the largest concentration of LGBT residents among the city’s eight wards and is home to two LGBT community centers, one of which – Casa Ruby – reaches out to the LGBT Latino community. Activists say that Graham’s prospects for winning the primary would increase significantly if he can retain the support of LGBT voters who have backed him overwhelmingly in past elections.
No Republican, Statehood Green Party or Libertarian Party candidate entered the Ward 1 Council race this year, a development that means Graham would likely face one or more lesser known independent candidates in the November general election if he wins the Democratic nomination in the primary.
Bonds, meanwhile, is being challenged by four other Democrats in the primary in her race for one of two at-large Council seats that will be on the ballot in the November general election. In a process that has often confounded voters, one of the two seats is reserved for a non-majority party candidate under the city’s election law, which means a Democrat cannot compete for the second seat.
Gay D.C. Council member David Catania (I-At-Large) has held the so-called non-Democratic seat since 1997, when he won a special election to fill the then vacant seat. He has been re-elected four times since then, but this year Catania said he’s strongly considering giving up his Council seat to run for mayor.
As an independent, he doesn’t have to make a final decision on whether to seek re-election to the Council or enter the mayoral race until June. Many of the city’s political pundits believe Catania will run for mayor, clearing the way for others to compete for his Council seat.
Gay Republican activist Marc Morgan, a Ward 1 Advisory Neighborhood Commissioner, is running unopposed in the Republican primary for one of the two at-large seats. Should Catania run for mayor, Morgan could be in a strong position to compete for the non-Democratic seat.
A Libertarian Party candidate, who is running unopposed in his party’s primary, and one of two Statehood Green Party candidates running in that party’s primary, will be competing with Morgan for the non-Democratic seat in the November election.
Another openly gay candidate, Libertarian Party activist Martin Moulton, is running unopposed in the Libertarian primary for the city’s U.S. shadow representative seat. Moulton is expected to compete for the shadow seat in the November general election against Democrat Franklin Garcia, who’s running unopposed in the Democratic primary in April.
Out of the four Democrats running against Bonds in the primary, Nate Bennett-Fleming, who currently holds the U.S. shadow representative seat, is considered to be her strongest opponent. Bennett-Fleming has expressed strong support for LGBT rights and won the endorsement of the Gertrude Stein Democratic Club, the city’s largest LGBT political group, when he ran for the seat in 2012.
The city created shadow U.S. Senate seats and one shadow House of Representatives seat as unpaid lobbying positions to advocate for D.C. statehood and voting representation in Congress.
Although some consider the shadow seats to be of little value because they have no official connection with the U.S. Congress, Bennett-Fleming received more than 43,000 votes when he won the Democratic primary for the seat in 2012. In the 2012 general election, Bennett-Fleming received nearly 207,000 votes.
When Bonds won the at-large seat in a special election last April she received 18,027 votes, or 31.4 percent, in a seven-candidate race with one of the lowest voter turnouts of any D.C. election ever held.
The voter turnout is expected to be larger in this year’s April 1 primary and Bonds’ wider name recognition and longstanding involvement in city politics gives her an edge over Bennett-Fleming and the other three candidates, according to most pundits. But Bonds and her LGBT supporters say she is waging an aggressive outreach effort to capture the LGBT vote to boost her re-election prospects.
Elissa Silverman, a Democrat who came in second behind Bonds in the 2012 special election, reportedly is considering changing her party affiliation from Democrat to independent to run for the non-Democratic at-large seat in the general election.
District of Columbia
Mary’s House founder, CEO retires
Dr. Imani Woody played leading role in opening DC’s first home for LGBTQ seniors
The board of directors for Mary’s House for Older Adults, DC’s first official home dedicated to providing affordable housing for LGBTQ seniors, announced on July 7 that its founding president and CEO, Dr. Imani Woody, has retired.
Woody, who holds a PhD in Human Services, is credited with playing a leading role over many years in arranging both city and private funding needed to construct and operate the Mary’s House three-story building located at 401 Anacostia Road, S.E., in the city’s Fort Dupont neighborhood.
The house, which opened in March 2025, with a grand opening ceremony held in May 2025, includes 15 single-occupancy residential units and more than 5,000 square feet of shared communal living space.
“It is with profound gratitude and hearts full of celebration that the board of directors of Mary’s House for Older Adults, DC (MHFOA) announces the retirement of our visionary founder, Dr. Imani Woody, from her role as president and CEO,” the Mary’s House board says in a statement.
“Dr. Woody’s journey with Mary’s House began with her vision and a kitchen table gathering of women with a bold, urgent, and loving vision: to create safe, affirming, affordable housing for LGBTQ/SGL older adults in Washington, DC,” the statement says.
It adds, “What started as a dream has grown into DC’s first affordable LGBTQ+/SGL affirming communal living space for adults 60 and over, a 15-room community residence at 401 Anacostia Road in Southeast Washington.”
The statement says Woody will continue to serve on Mary’s House board.
“The board will be sharing information about the leadership transition process in the coming weeks,” the statement continues. “We are committed to honoring Dr. Woody’s legacy by ensuring Mary’s House continues to thrive and grow in faithful service to LGBTQ/SGL elders experiencing housing insecurity and isolation.”
Maryland
Va., Md., advocates brace for next fight after Supreme Court sports ruling
Neither state has statewide ban on trans student athletes
On June 30, the U.S. Supreme Court cleared the way for states to enforce laws barring transgender students from participating on school sports teams consistent with their gender identity, a decision LGBTQ advocates say could encourage additional restrictions across the country.
While neither Maryland nor Virginia currently has a statewide ban on trans student athletes, advocates say the decision could reshape future legislative battles and school policies throughout the region.
Directly following the case, attorneys for trans student athletes spoke out about the case and how detrimental it could be to students.
“This ruling is deeply harmful for transgender women and girls who only asked for the ability to participate in sports with their peers,” said Sasha Buchert, senior attorney and director of the Nonbinary and Transgender Rights Project for Lambda Legal, in a press release from the American Civil Liberties Union.
The next step is figuring out how states will move forward, specifically in Maryland and Virginia.
As of right now, neither state has bans on trans athletes in schools. The new Supreme Court decision also does not require states to enact bans, only that bans are allowed if states or school districts choose to enforce them.
According to the ACLU, 27 states have banned trans youth from participating in school sports since 2020. Most of these states also require sex testing, which the organization says is invasive for all female athletes.
Equality Virginia Executive Director Narissa Rahaman said that while she has heard a lot of frustration following the decision, people are ready to take action.
“Families, parents and youth have lived through disappointing changes to the Virginia Department of Education’s model policies for the treatment of transgender students, and the Virginia High School League’s decades-old policy that allowed transgender students an opportunity to play sports with their friends,” Rahaman said in a statement to the Washington Blade.
She believes they are not ready to give up this fight quite yet.
As of now, trans and nonbinary students are protected under Virginia law, and Rahaman wants that to continue.
“This ruling will likely embolden right-wing members of the General Assembly to pursue trans athlete bans, and we will continue to defeat every bill like we have the past five legislative sessions. Now is our time to be proactive,” Rahaman said.
She also calls upon Democratic Gov. Abigail Spanberger to defend trans youth in Virginia from what she describes as bullies and to continue to stand up to federal attacks on the trans community in general.
For trans students, Rahaman wants to ensure that they continue to know that they belong and have a place in school sports.
“To the transgender young people watching this decision unfold: you belong on your team, in your school, in your community, and here in Virginia. This ruling does not change that. A single Supreme Court decision cannot define your worth or your future,” Rahaman said.
For people who may be outside the community but want to help, she encourages them to speak with trans and nonbinary people in their community, befriend the families of youth to show their support, and continue to speak up on these issues when needed.
According to ACLU of Virginia, high schooler Eliza Munshi was told she could not compete on the girls’ track team because she was trans. To prove a point, she decided to compete with the boys.
She had previously competed on the girls’s track team before her Virginia school decided to enforce the ban demanded by President Donald Trump. With pink hair and pink makeup, she decided to continue her love for the sport alongside boys. According to Munshi, her entire community rallied for her.
“I did it to prove a point. I knew I could do it. I knew it wouldn’t phase me. My gender itself and that label has been the least important part of my transition: I want to look how I want to look. I want to dress how I want to dress. If you don’t like that, then that’s not my business,” Munshi said.
DOE has launched Title IX probe against Md. school districts
In the weeks leading up to the ruling, multiple Maryland school districts were included in a Title IX probe stating that not enforcing sex-based protections guaranteed by federal law. Currently, there have been no updates on the lawsuit or the district’s decisions.
According to the U.S. Department of Education, the federal probe is based on parent complaints that the school districts were violating a specific Trump-Vance administration addition to Title IX, stating it aligned the sex-based protections “with biological reality, not ideological fantasy.”
According to FreeState Justice, an LGBTQ advocacy group in Maryland, while this is a disappointing ruling to see, they will continue to fight for trans student-athletes in Maryland and want trans youth to know that they belong.
“Every young person deserves the opportunity to participate in school and community life without being singled out because of who they are. These decisions send a harmful message to transgender youth that they are somehow less deserving of that opportunity,” said Phillip Westry, the group’s executive director.
Westry wants to make sure the community knows that their commitment to the organization has not changed and will continue to provide the same legal services they have prior and to advance policy solutions, to ensure “every LGBTQ+ Marylander can live with dignity, safety, and equal opportunity.”
Another issue brought up by trans advocates is the issue of testing women to determine whether they are biologically female or not.
According to Human Rights Watch, as of 2023, World Athletics required cis women with increased testosterone levels to undergo medical procedures to have it reduced to avoid advantages. Other forms of “sex verification” may include genetic testing, screenings of an athlete’s anatomy or chromosomes.
However, this can become detrimental because not all women have ovaries, a uterus, or XX chromosomes, meaning cisgender women could potentially be included in these bans, depending on how the specific state plans to enforce them.
Maryland
Eastern Shore school board wants an 18-and-over rule for young adult books
Classics like ‘To Kill a Mockingbird’ and ‘Little Women’ might be off limits to most students
By LIZ BOWIE | Somerset County’s school board is considering barring students under the age of 18 from reading any young-adult literature in school libraries, essentially restricting all but 12th graders from checking out books written for teens and tweens.
The proposed policy also calls for the superintendent to discipline librarians if “adult” reading material appears in the children’s section.
The policy defines young adult as students over 18. “Young adults are not minors and books suitable for young adults shall be placed on a separate Young Adults library section to reflect age-appropriate literature,” a draft of the policy says.
The rest of this article can be read on the Baltimore Banner’s website.
Mary’s House founder, CEO retires
Va., Md., advocates brace for next fight after Supreme Court sports ruling
Eastern Shore school board wants an 18-and-over rule for young adult books
Gay teacher, LGBTQ-supportive parent win $1 million in Fairfax County defamation lawsuits
As Washington shifts right, Democratic Socialists gain ground
‘Transcendent’ a tough but important read
‘My Favorite Sociopath’ debuts at Shepherdstown’s CATF
Under-the-radar Delaware beach towns smart buyers are targeting
In Trump’s divided America, Michael Weinstein’s AHF responds
