National
Justice Dept. objects to ‘Don’t Ask’ injunction
Obama administration calls proposal ‘untenable’
The U.S. Justice Department on Thursday issued an objection to a proposed judgment seeking to bar enforcement of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” on the basis that a military-wide injunction of the statute is “untenable.”
The Obama administration issued the 19-page objection in the wake of the California federal court ruling in the case of Log Cabin Republicans v. United States that found “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” is unconstitutional.
Plaintiffs in the case had sought an injunction against the enforcement of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” as a result of their victory, but the Justice Department this week urged U.S. District Court Judge Virginia Phillips not to issue that order.
Instead, the Justice Department asks the court to limit the injunction to members of the Log Cabin Republicans who serve in the armed forces.
The next step in the process is for Phillips to determine what judgment she will enter in the case. The Obama administration will then have 60 days to make an appeal to the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.
In a statement, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs maintained President Obama is committed to legislatively repealing “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” even though his administration filed the objection.
“This filing in no way diminishes the president’s firm commitment to achieve a legislative repeal of [‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’] — indeed, it clearly shows why Congress must act to end this misguided policy,” Gibbs said,
But advocates working for “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal are expressing indignation over the Obama administration’s objection to the injunction.
Executive director of Servicemembers United, Alex Nicholson (Blade photo by Michael Key)
Alex Nicholson, executive director of Servicemembers United and sole named plaintiff in the lawsuit, said Obama is “certainly taking his so-called ‘duty to defend’ this anti-gay military as far as he possibly can.”
“Two blows from the White House in one week is a bit much,” Nicholson said. “First, the president cannot find the time to make any phone calls to senators to help us avoid a crushing loss on Tuesday, although he does manage to find the time to call the WNBA national champions to congratulate them on their victory. Then, the president once again goes much farther than he has to in defense of the discriminatory and unconstitutional ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ law.”
R. Clarke Cooper, executive director of the National Log Cabin Republicans, also chastised Obama for the Justice Department’s objection.
“We are not surprised by this but we are extremely disappointed with the Obama administration,” Cooper said. “Many times on the campaign trail, President Obama said he would support the repeal of ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.’ Now that it’s time to step up to the plate, he isn’t even in the ballpark.”
The Justice Department offers various reasons for why Log Cabin’s proposed judgment is untenable. One justification that the administration offers is that a military-wide injunction against “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” would interfere with higher court rulings and foreclose the possibility of litigation in other courts.
“If this court were to enjoin all discharges under [‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’] throughout the world, it would not only effectively overrule the decisions of numerous other circuits that have upheld [‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’], but also preclude consideration of similar challenges by courts in other circuits that have not addressed the issue (not to mention other district judges in the Central District of California) prior to any decision by the Ninth Circuit,” the administration states.
The Justice Department argues that Log Cabin’s proposed judgment would be at odds with the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruling in Witt v. Air Force, which allows the opportunity for the U.S. military to prove a gay service member undermines unit cohesion before discharging them.
Additionally, the Justice Department says an injunction would interfere with legislative efforts to repeal “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” as well as the Pentagon working group’s efforts to develop a plan to implement repeal.
“Entering an injunction with immediate effect would frustrate the ability of the Department of Defense to develop necessary policies, regulations, and training and guidance to accommodate a change in the [‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell] law and policy,” the administration states. “An injunction with immediate effect will put [Defense Department] in the position where it must implement ad hoc potentially inadequate policies at a time when the military is in the midst of active combat operations.”
Dan Woods, an attorney at White & Case representing plaintiffs in the case, said the objections from the Justice Department suggest that it doesn’t realize it’s the losing party in the lawsuit.
“The Justice Department’s objections fail to recognize the implications of the government’s defeat at the trial,” Woods said. “It is as if the South announced that it won the Civil War.”
Woods notes that the court previously dismissed the administration’s requests for a stay in the case on three prior occasions and “nothing has changed to suggest that a stay is now appropriate.”
“What is most troubling is that the government’s request for a stay ignores the harm that Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell causes to current and potential members of our Armed Forces,” Woods said. “That is the saddest, most disappointing, and, in light of the president’s position, most hypocritical part of the objections.”
U.S. Federal Courts
Federal judge blocks Trump passport executive order
State Department can no longer issue travel documents with ‘X’ gender markers
A federal judge on Friday ruled in favor of a group of transgender and nonbinary people who have filed a lawsuit against President Donald Trump’s executive order that bans the State Department from issuing passports with “X” gender markers.
The Associated Press notes U.S. District Judge Julia Kobick in Boston issued a preliminary injunction against the directive. The American Civil Liberties Union, which represents the plaintiffs, in a press release notes Kobick concluded Trump’s executive order “is likely unconstitutional and in violation of the law.”
“The preliminary injunction requires the State Department to allow six transgender and nonbinary people to obtain passports with sex designations consistent with their gender identity while the lawsuit proceeds,” notes the ACLU. “Though today’s court order applies only to six of the plaintiffs in the case, the plaintiffs plan to quickly file a motion asking the court to certify a class of people affected by the State Department policy and to extend the preliminary injunction to that entire class.”
Former Secretary of State Antony Blinken in June 2021 announced the State Department would begin to issue gender-neutral passports and documents for American citizens who were born overseas.
Dana Zzyym, an intersex U.S. Navy veteran who identifies as nonbinary, in 2015 filed a federal lawsuit against the State Department after it denied their application for a passport with an “X” gender marker. Zzyym in October 2021 received the first gender-neutral American passport.
The State Department policy took effect on April 11, 2022. Trump signed his executive order shortly after he took office in January.
Germany, Denmark, Finland, and the Netherlands are among the countries that have issued travel advisories for trans and nonbinary people who plan to visit the U.S.
“This ruling affirms the inherent dignity of our clients, acknowledging the immediate and profound negative impact that the Trump administration’s passport policy would have on their ability to travel for work, school, and family,” said ACLU of Massachusetts Legal Director Jessie Rossman after Kobick issued her ruling.
“By forcing people to carry documents that directly contradict their identities, the Trump administration is attacking the very foundations of our right to privacy and the freedom to be ourselves,” added Rossman. “We will continue to fight to rescind this unlawful policy for everyone so that no one is placed in this untenable and unsafe position.”
State Department
HIV/AIDS activists protest at State Department, demand full PEPFAR funding restoration
Black coffins placed in front of Harry S. Truman Building
Dozens of HIV/AIDS activists on Thursday gathered in front of the State Department and demanded the Trump-Vance administration fully restore President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief funding.
Housing Works CEO Charles King, Health GAP Executive Director Asia Russell, Human Rights Campaign Senior Public Policy Advocate Matthew Rose, and others placed 206 black Styrofoam coffins in front of the State Department before the protest began.
King said more than an estimated 100,000 people with HIV/AIDS will die this year if PEPFAR funding is not fully restored.
“If we continue to not provide the PEPFAR funding to people living in low-income countries who are living with HIV or at risk, we are going to see millions and millions of deaths as well as millions of new infections,” added King.
Then-President George W. Bush in 2003 signed legislation that created PEPFAR.
The Trump-Vance administration in January froze nearly all U.S. foreign aid spending for at least 90 days. Secretary of State Marco Rubio later issued a waiver that allows the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS relief and other “life-saving humanitarian assistance” programs to continue to operate during the freeze.
The Washington Blade has previously reported PEPFAR-funded programs in Kenya and other African countries have been forced to suspend services and even shut down because of a lack of U.S. funding. Two South African organizations — OUT LGBT Well-being and Access Chapter 2 — that received PEPFAR funding through the U.S. Agency for International Development and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in recent weeks closed down HIV-prevention programs and other services to men who have sex with men.
Rubio last month said 83 percent of USAID contracts have been cancelled. He noted the State Department will administer those that remain in place “more effectively.”
“PEPFAR represents the best of us, the dignity of our country, of our people, of our shared humanity,” said Rose.
Russell described Rubio as “ignorant and incompetent” and said “he should be fired.”
“What secretary of state in 90 days could dismantle what the brilliance of AIDS activism created side-by-side with George W. Bush? What kind of fool could do that? I’ll tell you who, the boss who sits in the Harry S. Truman Building, Marco Rubio,” said Russell.
U.S. Military/Pentagon
Pentagon urged to reverse Naval Academy book ban
Hundreds of titles discussing race, gender, and sexuality pulled from library shelves
Lambda Legal and the Legal Defense Fund issued a letter on Tuesday urging U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth to reverse course on a policy that led to the removal of 381 books from the Nimitz Library of the U.S. Naval Academy in Annapolis, Md.
Pursuant to President Donald Trump’s executive order 14190, “Ending Radical Indoctrination in K-12 Schooling,” the institution screened 900 titles to identify works promoting “diversity, equity, and inclusion,” removing those that concerned or touched upon “topics pertaining to the experiences of people of color, especially Black people, and/or LGBTQ people,” according to a press release from the civil rights organizations.
These included “I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings” by Maya Angelou, “Stone Fruit” by Lee Lai, “The Hate U Give” by Angie Thomas, “Lies My Teacher Told Me: Everything Your American History Textbook Got Wrong” by James W. Loewen, “Gender Queer: A Memoir” by Maia Kobabe, and “Democracy in Black: How Race Still Enslaves the American Soul” by Eddie S. Glaude, Jr.
The groups further noted that “the collection retained other books with messages and themes that privilege certain races and religions over others, including ‘The Clansman: A Historical Romance of the Ku Klux Klan’ by Thomas Dixon, Jr., ‘Mein Kampf’ by Adolf Hitler, and ‘Heart of Darkness’ by Joseph Conrad.
In their letter, Lambda Legal and LDF argued the books must be returned to circulation to preserve the “constitutional rights” of cadets at the institution, warning of the “danger” that comes with “censoring materials based on viewpoints disfavored by the current administration.”
“Such censorship is especially dangerous in an educational setting, where critical inquiry, intellectual diversity, and exposure to a wide array of perspectives are necessary to educate future citizen-leaders,” Lambda Legal Chief Legal Officer Jennifer C. Pizer and LDF Director of Strategic Initiatives Jin Hee Lee said in the press release.
‘Pronoun Trouble’ reminds us that punctuation matters
Federal judge blocks Trump passport executive order
Gay Men’s Chorus of Washington to celebrate Spring Affair honorees
Goodlander endorses Pappas’s Senate bid
Local attorney, LGBTQ rights advocate Dale Sanders dies at 75
Gay Venezuelan makeup artist remains in El Salvador mega prison
Reenactment of 1965 gay rights protest at White House set for April 17
HIV/AIDS activists protest at State Department, demand full PEPFAR funding restoration
Science must not be a weapon against trans people
Md. schools plan to comply with federal DEI demands
-
El Salvador3 days agoGay Venezuelan makeup artist remains in El Salvador mega prison
-
District of Columbia5 days agoReenactment of 1965 gay rights protest at White House set for April 17
-
State Department2 days agoHIV/AIDS activists protest at State Department, demand full PEPFAR funding restoration
-
Opinions4 days agoScience must not be a weapon against trans people