National
McCaskill latest to back same-sex marriage
Mo. senator says supporting same-sex marriage ‘is simply the right thing to do’


Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.) came out in support for marriage equality via Tumblr posting (Photo public domain)
A Democratic U.S. senator representing a socially conservative state on Sunday night became the latest prominent figure to came out in support of marriage equality.
Via her Tumblr account, Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.) made her relatively low-key announcement in a posting with a title that cites a biblical passage: “And now abide faith, hope, love, these three; but the greatest of these is love. I Corinthians 13.”
In her posting, McCaskill says she reached her decision because many of her gay and lesbian friends were embracing long-term committed relationships and she found herself “unable to look them in the eye without honestly confronting this uncomfortable inequality.”
“Supporting marriage equality for gay and lesbian couples is simply the right thing to do for our country, a country founded on the principals of liberty and equality,” McCaskill says.
McCaskill notes significant debate is taking place within the United States on marriage rights for same-sex couples and says people of faith of have taken different sides on the issue. She maintains churches shouldn’t be forced to recognize a union that’s inconsistent with their beliefs, but government is a different matter.
“I have come to the conclusion that our government should not limit the right to marry based on who you love,” McCaskill says. “While churches should never be required to conduct marriages outside of their religious beliefs, neither should the government tell people who they have a right to marry.”
McCaskill concludes her posting by predicting the issue won’t be controversial in the future.
“Good people disagree with me,” McCaskill says. “On the other hand, my children have a hard time understanding why this is even controversial. I think history will agree with my children.”
The announcement comes on heels of other recent high-profile figures announcing support for marriage equality. These include Sen. Rob Portman (R-Ohio) to former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.
McCaskiil also announced her new position just days before the U.S. Supreme Court is set to hear arguments on the constitutionality of California’s Proposition 8 and the Defense of Marriage Act.
A.J. Bockelman, executive director of the Missouri LGBT statewide rights group PROMO, praised McCaskill and compared her evolution to that of President Obama’s.
“As we have seen with the President, our own Sen. Claire McCaskill has evolved on marriage equality,” Bockelman said. “We are proud to have her represent fair minded Missourians in the Senate.”
McCaskill comes out for marriage equality just after she won re-election following a closely watched race between her and former Republican Congressman W. Todd Akin, whose campaign imploded when he said a woman’s body can terminate a pregnancy after a “legitimate rape.” McCaskill won’t come up for election again until her six-year term ends in 2018.
The last public statement from McCaskill on same-sex marriage was in an article published Thursday in Politico in which she she was considering the issue, but hadn’t yet come to support marriage rights for gay couples.
āI think thereās a lot of shift going on in the country, and Iām thinking about it,ā McCaskill was quoted as saying at the time.
McCaskill has a somewhat strong record on LGBT rights as a member of the Senate, although she hasn’t taken a leadership role on the issue. A member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, she was among the those who voted in favor of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal in May 2010 even before the Pentagon report came out for implementing open service later that year.
In the Human Rights Campaign’s most recent congressional scorecard, McCaskill scored a 76 out of 100 points. She lost points for not co-sponsoring bills such as the legislation to repeal DOMA and the Uniting American Families Act.
U.S. Federal Courts
Second judge blocks Trump’s anti-trans military ban
Federal courts in D.C. and Washington State have now issued injunctions

The U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington on Thursday became the second court to issue a nationwide injunction blocking the enforcement of President Donald Trump’s executive order barring transgender people from military service.
The order in Schilling v. Trump from Judge Benjamin Hale Settle comes after Judge Ana Reyes of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia blocked implementation of the ban earlier this month in Talbott v. Trump.
Friday was the date by which the Pentagon was to begin identifying and separating transgender service members from the armed forces, per Trump’s executive action.
The lead attorneys in Talbott v. Trump, GLAD Law Senior Director of Transgender and Queer Rights Jennifer Levi and Shannon Minter, legal director of the National Center for Lesbian Rights, shared statements about the injunction in a press release by NCLR.
āGiven the thousands of brave and decorated transgender servicemembers facing unthinkable harms as the result of this ban, we are heartened but not surprised by todayās decision,ā Levi said. “President Trump’s executive order and Secretary [Pete] Hegseth’s implementation represent a policy that cannot be constitutionally justified. Thousands of transgender servicemembers currently serving have clearly demonstrated they meet all military standards, with many deployed to critical missions worldwide, proving their capabilities beyond question.”
Levi continued, “These dedicated servicemembers and their families have earned our nation’s gratitude and respect, and the government has a responsibility to honor the commitments it has made to them. This is about keeping faith with Americans who have risked everything to defend our freedoms.”
āIn both Talbott and Shilling, it was abundantly clear to the court that it must act swiftly to protect our troops from an unconstitutional and indefensible ban that would disrupt the lives and dismantle the careers of thousands of transgender servicemembers and their families,” Minter said. “The harms associated with this ban are gut-wrenching.ā
Minter continued, āIn each of these cases, the government did not even attempt to claim that any evidence supported its position. There is no reason to discharge individuals who are serving capably and honorably.ā
U.S. Federal Courts
Federal judge hears case that challenges Trump passport executive order
State Department no longer issues passports with ‘X’ gender markers

A federal judge in Boston on Tuesday heard oral arguments in a lawsuit against President Donald Trump’s executive order that bans the State Department from issuing passports with “X” gender markers.
Ashton Orr, Zaya Perysian, Sawyer Soe, Chastain Anderson, Drew Hall, Bella Boe, and Reid Solomon-Lane are the plaintiffs in the class action lawsuit the American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU of Massachusetts, and the private law firm Covington & Burling LPP filed in U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts. The lawsuit names Trump and Secretary of State Marco Rubio as defendants.
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 āXā 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 the executive order that overturned it shortly after he took office. Rubio later directed State Department personnel to āsuspend any application requesting an āXā sex marker and do not take any further action pending additional guidance from the department.ā
āEven before Donald Trump was inaugurated, it was clear to me he wanted to control the lives and identities of transgender people like myself,ā said Orr, a transgender man who lives in West Virginia, in a press release the ACLU released before U.S. District Judge Julia Kobick heard the case. āLike many others, I rushed to update my passport hoping I could get an accurate version. Now, the State Department has suspended my application and withheld all my documents from me, including my passport, my birth certificate, and even my marriage license.”
Li Nowlin-Sohl, a staff attorney for the ACLU’s LGBTQ and HIV Project, described the Trump-Vance administration’s passport policy as “openly discriminatory and animated by a transparent desire to drive transgender people out of public life altogether.”
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.
WorldPride is scheduled to take place in D.C. from May 17-June 8. InterPride, the organization that coordinates WorldPride events, on March 12 issued its own travel advisory for trans and nonbinary people who want to travel to the U.S.
It is unclear when Kobick will issue her ruling.
Federal Government
Trump ‘culture war’ complicates HUD’s distribution of $3.6B in housing grants
Senate Dems call for new agreements

The disbursement of more than $3.6 billion in federal grants to housing providers has been paused for weeks while the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development seeks to condition receipt of the funding on compliance with President Donald Trump’s executive actions targeting DEI and transgender and immigrant communities.
March 4 was the statutory deadline for the agency to distribute the funds, which come through the Continuum of Care Program in support of local governments and nonprofit organizations working to promote “a community-wide commitment to the goal of ending homelessness.”
On March 13, a group of Senate Democrats led by U.S. Sens. Adam Schiff (Calif.) and Tina Smith (Minn.) wrote to HUD Secretary Scott Turner urging him to move quickly on distributing the grants and warning of the consequences that recipients are now facing and the harm they will encounter in the future if delays persist.
“To keep the lights on, providers are now being forced to draw on lines of credit at significant cost and risk to their organizations,” the senators said. “These projects enable homeless service providers to help veterans, families with children, youth, seniors, and vulnerable individuals access permanent and temporary housing, crisis counseling, and other supportive services.ā
HUD subsequently disseminated grant agreements ā and Schiff published an example on his office’s website ā that included, among other provisions, language stipulating that the awardee (1) “shall not use grant funds to promote ‘gender ideology,’ as defined in E.O. 14168, Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government,” (2) certifies that it does not operate any programs promoting diversity, equity, and inclusion that violate any applicable Federal anti-discrimination laws, and (3) agrees not to use “that funding in a manner that by design or effect facilitates the subsidization or promotion of illegal immigration or abets so-called ‘sanctuary’ policies that seek to shield illegal aliens from deportation.”
On March 14, the 4th U.S. Court of Appeals stayed a nationwide injunction enjoining three parts of Trump’s executive order on DEI, and the following day, HUD rescinded the CoC contracts and said to expect new agreements within a week as the agency was “working to revise its CoC grant agreements to be consistent with Federal law and compliant with applicable court orders.”
Schiff then led a second letter to Turner on March 19 with the Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer (N.Y.) and U.S. Sens. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), Mazie Hirono (D- Hawaii), and Richard Blumenthal (Conn.).
“We urge the department to immediately issue new CoC grant agreements consistent with longstanding practiceā free of the aforementioned conditionsā to ensure all individuals experiencing homelessness receive protection and support, regardless of gender identity, location, or other characteristics,” they said, requesting a response by March 31.
“The initial FY2024 grant agreements issued to CoC funding recipients contained new requirements that are deeply problematic, and likely unlawful, requirements,” the senators argued. “These mandates, such as barring shelters from serving transgender people, prohibiting DEI initiatives, and certifying that they do not support ‘sanctuary’ policies protecting noncitizens, conflict with federal civil rights, fair housing, and immigration laws, raising serious legal and constitutional concerns.”
The lawmakers noted “the harm caused by these delayed and unfulfilled CoC grant agreements will fall disproportionately on our most vulnerable populations, including women, families with children, youth, veterans, survivors of domestic and intimate partner violence, people with disabilities, and LGBTQ+ individuals.” They added, “Women experiencing homelessness ā many of whom are fleeing domestic abuse ā already face significant barriers to safety and stability, and restricting access to critical housing services will only further endanger their lives and well-being.”
Citing research that nearly one in three transgender Americans has experiences homelessness in their lives, Schiff and his colleagues stressed that “Transgender and nonbinary people in the U.S. face significant barriers to securing safe housing, with many experiencing homelessness and high rates of mistreatment and violence in shelters.”
With respect to the language in the agreements about “sanctuary” policies, the senators wrote “The organizations receiving CoC funds exist to provide critical, non-discriminatory aid to those in need, regardless of their immigration status. These organizations do not set or enforce immigration policy ā they simply fulfill their legal duty to provide life-saving and life-changing care.”
Later on March 19, HUD began issuing new contracts that did not contain the provision concerning DEI but did include the same language about “gender ideology” and “sanctuary” policies.
-
Opinions4 days ago
Finding the courage to flee U.S. to save my trans daughter
-
District of Columbia5 days ago
First D.C. LGBTQ seniors home readyĀ to open
-
Virginia5 days ago
Virginia governor vetoes bill barring discrimination against PrEP users
-
Books4 days ago
āHurt Capitalā chronicles young life of bipolar, trans writer