News
Lawmakers seek fed’l recognition for Michigan same-sex marriages
Delegation calls on DOJ to clarify whether administration will recognize unions
Sen. Carl Levin (D-Mich.) is among the lawmakers calling for federal recognition of Michigan same-sex marriages (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key).
In a letter dated March 27, six lawmakers — led by Rep. Dan Kildee (D-Mich.) — called on U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder to recognize the marriages in the wake of a federal district court decision striking down the state’s ban on same-sex marriage.
“The Court’s decision was a historic step toward equal protection for all American families, regardless of sexual orientation,” the lawmakers write. “By clarifying the federal status of these now married same-sex couples in Michigan—as you did in January for similarly situated same-sex couples in Utah—you can take another step toward full equality.”
Lawmakers seek federal recognition of the same-sex marriages performed on Saturday in Michigan prior to an indefinite stay placed on the weddings by the U.S. Sixth Circuit of Appeals. Gov. Rick Snyder, a Republican who’s seeking re-election, said Wednesday the state recognizes the marriages as legal, but won’t afford the couples state benefits unless the stay is lifted.
But the Justice Department hasn’t yet announced a decision on whether federal benefits would flow to the couples. The department didn’t immediately respond to a request to comment on the letter from Michigan’s federal delegation. Allison Price, a Justice Department spokesperson, had said earlier this week the administration is “closely monitoring the situation.”
Six Democratic members of Michigan’s federal delegation to Congress signed the letter. In addition to Kildee, Reps. John Dingell (D-Mich.), Sander Levin (D-Mich.) and Gary Peters (D-Mich.) signed the letter as well as both U.S. senators from Michigan: Carl Levin (D-Mich.) and Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.).
The only Democratic member of Michigan federal delegation not to sign the letter is Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich.). His absence is noteworthy because he supports marriage equality and was chief sponsor of the Matthew Shepard & James Byrd Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act, which extended federal hate crimes protections to LGBT people. Conyers’ office didn’t immediately respond to a request to comment on why his name was absent from the letter.
None of the nine Republicans making up the 16 members of Michigan’s federal delegation to Congress signed the letter.
Mitchell Rivard, a Kildee spokesperson, deferred to the Republicans as to why their names are absent from the missive.
“The Democratic delegation, as demonstrated by today’s letter calling for federal recognition of the legal marriages performed last week, are certainly unified in standing for equality for all Michiganders,” Rivard said.
Among the couples who wed in Michigan on Saturday were Anne Callison, 37, and Kelly Callison, 34. The couple, who has a two-year-old named Corbin, married in Ann Arbor, Mich., after being been together five years.
During a conference call with reporters, Anne said recognition of her marriage is important so that Kelly has second-parent adoption rights for their son. Kelly is the egg donor for Corbin, but Anne is the birth mother.
“I would say the thing that’s the most scary is that in order for Kelly to do things like pick him up from child care…access his medical records, all of that means that I have to give permission ahead of time,” Anne said. “Kelly is a stay-at-home mom, and I am working full-time. She should be able to do those things.”
Taking issue with Snyder’s decision not to allow benefits to flow to her and her spouse, Anne said she doesn’t understand why a stay being in place halting additional same-sex marriages led to that decision.
“I’m married, I have a Michigan marriage certificate, it has a seal and witnesses,” Anne said. “I don’t know how much more legal it can get than that.”
For her part, Kelly said the lack of recognition of her marriage continues to build “stress and anxiety” for her entire family.
“We have a two-year-old son that is the center of our lives and because of Gov. Snyder not recognizing a marriage that he himself said is a legal marriage, but the state won’t recognize [it], just adds to the stress that what goes on with our daily lives,” Kelly said.
Under the current situation, Kelly said the couple carries around a notebook of documents to ensure she can make medical and other important decisions for Corbin.
In a statement, Kildee said Anne and Kelly’s union should be recognized by both the state and federal government, criticizing Snyder and Michigan Attorney General Bill Schuette for not allowing benefits to flow to the couple.
“Legally-performed marriages like Anne and Kelly’s should be fully recognized under the law, both at the state and federal level,” Kildee said. “It’s a shame to me that Gov. Snyder and Bill Schuette continue to work around the clock to deny these committed couples the same opportunity for love and happiness that they enjoy themselves.”
The situation in Michigan is along the lines of what happened in Utah after a district court ruling enabled an estimated 1,300 same-sex couples to wed in the state until the U.S. Supreme Court halted the weddings by issuing a stay pending appeal. Gov. Gary Herbert announced his state won’t recognize the weddings pending appeal, but U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder said the state would recognize for the purposes of federal benefits.
Prior to Holder’s announcement, Human Rights Campaign President Chad Griffin wrote a letter to the attorney general, saying there’s no need to think the Utah marriages are invalid.
The Human Rights Campaign issued an organizational statement late Thursday calling for the federal recognition of same-sex marriages performed in Michigan.
“The Department of Justice under Attorney General Eric Holder has been a remarkable leader in the fight for equal recognition of marriage for lesbian and gay couples,” the statement says. “Their decision to recognize marriages performed in Utah during the period when gay couples were granted licenses was legally sound and morally right. The Human Rights Campaign has encouraged the Department to apply the same principles to the Michigan marriages that happened recently and we have every reason to believe that they will continue being champions of the LGBT community.”
District of Columbia
Whitman-Walker Health to present ‘Pro Bono Excellence’ award to law firm
Health center set to celebrate 40th anniversary of legal services program
Whitman-Walker Health, the D.C.-based community healthcare center that specializes in HIV/AIDS and LGBTQ-related health services, announced it will present its annual Dale Edwin Sanders Award for Pro Bono Excellence to the international law firm McDermott Will & Schulte at a May 6 ceremony.
“This year’s award is especially significant as it coincides with the 40th anniversary of Whitman-Walker Health’s Legal Services Program, marking it as the nation’s longest running medical-legal partnership,” a statement released by Whitman-Walker says.
“As a national leader in public health, Whitman-Walker celebrates our partnership with McDermott to strengthen the health center and to enable Whitman-Walker to reach more medical and legal clients,” the statement adds.
“McDermott’s firm-wide commitment to Whitman-Walker’s medical-legal partnership demonstrates a shared vision to serve those most in need,” Amy Nelson, Whitman-Walker’s director of Legal Services, says in the statement. “Our work protects individuals and families who face discrimination and hostility as they navigate increasingly complex administrative systems,” Nelson said.
“Pro bono legal services – like that of McDermott Will & Schulte – find solutions for people who have no place else to turn in the face of financial and health threats,” she added.
“Our partnership with Whitman-Walker Health is a treasured commitment to serving our neighbors and communities,” Steven Schnelle, one of the law firm’s partners said in the statement. “We are deeply moved by Whitman-Walker’s unwavering dedication to inclusion, respect, and equitable access to health care and social services,” he said.
The statement notes that the award for Pro Bono Excellence honors the legacy of the late gay attorney Dale Edwin Sanders. It says Sanders’s pro bono legal work for Whitman-Walker clients “shaped HIV/AIDS law for more than four decades by securing key victories on behalf of individuals whose employment and patient rights were violated.”
It says the Whitman-Walker Legal Services program began during the early years of the AIDS epidemic in the 1980s at a time when people with AIDS faced widespread discrimination and often needed legal assistance. According to the statement, the program evolved over the years and expanded to advocate for transgender people and immigrants.
Noticias en Español
La X vuelve al tribunal
Primer Circuito examina caso del reconocimiento de personas no binarias en Puerto Rico
Hace ocho meses escribí sobre este tema cuando todavía no había llegado al nivel judicial en el que se encuentra hoy. En ese momento, la discusión se movía entre decisiones administrativas, debates públicos y resistencias políticas. No era un asunto cerrado, pero tampoco había alcanzado el punto actual.
Hoy el escenario es distinto.
La organización Lambda Legal compareció ante el Tribunal de Apelaciones del Primer Circuito en Boston para solicitar que se confirme una decisión que obliga al gobierno de Puerto Rico a emitir certificados de nacimiento que reflejen la identidad de las personas no binarias. La apelación se produce luego de que un tribunal de distrito concluyera que negar esa posibilidad constituye una violación a la Constitución de Estados Unidos.
Este elemento marca la diferencia. Ya no se trata de una discusión conceptual. Existe una determinación judicial que identificó un trato desigual.
El planteamiento de la parte demandante se sostiene en el propio marco legal vigente en Puerto Rico. Los certificados de nacimiento de identidad no son registros históricos inmutables. Son documentos utilizados para fines actuales y esenciales. Permiten acceder a empleo, educación y servicios, y son requeridos en múltiples gestiones ante el Estado. Su función es operativa.
En ese contexto, la exclusión de las personas no binarias no responde a una limitación jurídica. Puerto Rico permite la corrección de marcadores de género en certificados de nacimiento para personas trans binarias desde el caso Arroyo González v. Rosselló Nevares. Además, el Código Civil reconoce la existencia de certificados que reflejan la identidad de la persona más allá del registro original.
La diferencia radica en la aplicación.
El reconocimiento se concede dentro de categorías específicas, mientras que se excluye a quienes no se identifican dentro de ese esquema. Esa exclusión es el eje de la controversia actual.
El argumento presentado por Lambda Legal es preciso. Obligar a una persona a utilizar documentos que no reflejan su identidad implica someterla a una representación incorrecta en procesos fundamentales de la vida cotidiana. Esto puede generar dificultades prácticas, exposición innecesaria y situaciones de vulnerabilidad.
Las personas demandantes, nacidas en Puerto Rico, han planteado que el acceso a documentos precisos no es una cuestión simbólica, sino una necesidad básica para poder desenvolverse sin contradicciones impuestas por el propio Estado.
El hecho de que este caso se encuentre en el sistema federal introduce una dimensión adicional. No se trata de un proyecto legislativo ni de una política pública en discusión. Es una controversia constitucional. El análisis gira en torno a derechos y a la aplicación equitativa de las leyes.
Este proceso tampoco ocurre en aislamiento.
Se desarrolla en un contexto donde los debates sobre identidad y derechos han estado marcados por una mayor presencia de posturas conservadoras en la esfera pública, tanto en Estados Unidos como en Puerto Rico. En el ámbito local, esa influencia ha sido visible en discusiones legislativas recientes, donde argumentos de carácter religioso han comenzado a formar parte del debate sobre política pública. Esa intersección introduce tensiones en torno a la separación entre iglesia y Estado y tiene efectos concretos en el acceso a derechos.
Señalar este contexto no implica cuestionar la fe ni la práctica religiosa. Implica reconocer que, cuando determinados argumentos se trasladan al ejercicio del poder público, pueden incidir en decisiones que afectan a sectores específicos de la población.
Desde Puerto Rico, esta situación no se observa a distancia. Se experimenta en la práctica diaria. En la necesidad de presentar documentos que no corresponden con la identidad de quien los porta. En las implicaciones que esto tiene en espacios laborales, educativos y administrativos.
El avance de este caso abre una posibilidad de cambio en el marco legal aplicable. No porque resuelva de inmediato todas las tensiones en torno al tema, sino porque establece un punto de análisis jurídico sobre una práctica que hasta ahora ha operado bajo criterios restrictivos.
A diferencia de hace ocho meses, el escenario actual incluye una determinación judicial que ya identificó una violación de derechos. Lo que corresponde ahora es evaluar si esa determinación se sostiene en una instancia superior.
Ese proceso no define un resultado inmediato, pero sí establece un nuevo punto de referencia.
El debate ya no es teórico.
Ahora es judicial.
New York
Court orders Pride flag to return to Stonewall
Lambda Legal, Washington Litigation Group filed federal lawsuit
The Pride flag will once again fly over the Stonewall National Monument in New York following a court order requiring the National Park Service to raise it over the site.
The decision follows a lawsuit filed by Lambda Legal and the Washington Litigation Group in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, which challenged the removal as unconstitutional under the Administrative Procedure Act and argued that the government unlawfully targeted the LGBTQ community.
In February, the NPS removed the Pride flag from the Stonewall National Monument, the first national monument dedicated to LGBTQ rights and history in the U.S. The move followed a Jan. 21 memorandum issued by President Donald Trump-appointed NPS Director Jessica Bowron restricting which flags may be flown at national parks. The directive limited displays to official government flags, with narrow exceptions for those deemed to serve an “official purpose.”
Plaintiffs successfully argued that the Pride flag meets that standard, given Stonewall’s status as the birthplace of the modern LGBTQ rights movement. They also contended that the policy violated the APA by bypassing required public input and improperly applying agency rules.
The lawsuit named Interior Secretary Doug Burgum, Bowron, and Amy Sebring, superintendent of Manhattan sites for the NPS, as defendants. Plaintiffs included the Gilbert Baker Foundation, Village Preservation, Equality New York, and several individuals.
The court found that the memorandum — while allowing limited exceptions for historical context purposes — was applied unlawfully in this case. As part of the settlement, the NPS is required to rehang the Pride flag on the monument’s official flagpole within seven days, where it will remain permanently.
“The sudden, arbitrary, and capricious removal of the Pride flag from the Stonewall National Monument was yet another act by this administration to erase the LGBTQ+ community,” said Karen Loewy, co-counsel for plaintiffs and Lambda Legal’s Senior Counsel and Director of Constitutional Law Practice. “Today, the government has pledged to restore this important symbol back to where it belongs.”
“This is a complete victory for our clients and for the LGBTQ+ community,” said Alexander Kristofcak, lead counsel for plaintiffs and a lawyer with Washington Litigation Group. “The government has acknowledged what we argued from day one: the Pride flag belongs at Stonewall. The flag will be restored and it will fly officially and permanently. And we will remain vigilant to ensure that the government sticks to the deal.”
“Gilbert Baker created the Rainbow Pride flag as a symbol of hope and liberation,” said Charles Beal, president of the Gilbert Baker Foundation. “Today, that symbol is restored to the place where it belongs, standing watch over the birthplace of the modern LGBTQ+ rights movement.”
“The government tried to erase an important symbol of the LGBTQ+ community, and the community said no,” said Amanda Babine, executive director of Equality New York. “Today’s accomplishment proves that when we stand together and fight back, we win.”
“The removal of the Pride flag from Stonewall was an attempt to erase LGBTQ+ history and undermine the rule of law,” said Andrew Berman, executive director of Village Preservation. “This settlement restores both.”
With Loewy on the complaint are Douglas F. Curtis, Camilla B. Taylor, Omar Gonzalez-Pagan, Kenneth D. Upton Jr., Jennifer C. Pizer, and Nephetari Smith from Lambda Legal. With Kristofcak on the complaint are Mary L. Dohrmann, Sydney Foster, Kyle Freeny, James I. Pearce, and Nathaniel Zelinsky from Washington Litigation Group.
Whitman-Walker Health to present ‘Pro Bono Excellence’ award to law firm
La X vuelve al tribunal
Court orders Pride flag to return to Stonewall
Sri Lankan government withdraws support for LGBTQ tourism initiative
In an act of artistic defiance, Baltimore Center Stage stays focused on DEI
Trump’s war threats trigger rare 25th Amendment discussion
HRC endorses Va. ballot initiative to redraw congressional districts
BLUF leather social set for April 10 in Rehoboth
The emperor has no clothes: how rhetoric fuels repression in Eswatini
LGBTQ community explores arming up during heated political times
-
Politics5 days agoTrump’s war threats trigger rare 25th Amendment discussion
-
2026 Midterm Elections4 days ago
HRC endorses Va. ballot initiative to redraw congressional districts
-
Rehoboth Beach4 days ago
BLUF leather social set for April 10 in Rehoboth
-
Eswatini4 days ago
The emperor has no clothes: how rhetoric fuels repression in Eswatini
