Local
Md. may recognize out-of-state gay marriages
Attorney general issues opinion as D.C. couples prepare to wed
Maryland Attorney General Doug Gansler (Photo courtesy of Maryland state government)
Maryland Attorney General Douglas Gansler issued a long-awaited opinion Wednesday saying same-sex marriages performed in other states or countries most likely would have full legal standing in the state.
But in his 53-page legal opinion, Gansler said the Maryland Court of Appeals would have the final say in the matter should opponents of same-sex marriage choose to contest the legal standing of married same-sex couples living in or visiting the state.
Gansler’s opinion comes one week before a law allowing same-sex marriages to be performed in D.C. is expected to take effect March 3. Same-sex couples in Maryland have said they would likely make wedding plans in the District in response to a favorable opinion from Gansler.
The attorney general’s opinion comes nine months after state Sen. Richard Madaleno (D-Montgomery County), who is gay, asked Gansler to issue an official opinion on the question of whether the state could legally recognize same-sex marriages from other jurisdictions.
“You have asked whether those marriages may be recognized under state law,” Gansler said in his opinion, which is addressed to Madaleno. “The answer to that question is clearly ‘yes.’”
Madaleno could not immediately be reached for comment, but he told the Washington Post in a brief interview that changes in state policy could now result from a court ruling, legislation or administrative action, though none of those is imminent.
Gansler says in the opinion that while he believes the legal concept of state “public policy” favors recognition of out-of-state gay marriages, others might raise legal grounds to contest that view.
In particular, he points to the 2007 ruling by the Maryland Court of Appeals upholding the state’s marriage law banning same-sex marriages from being performed in the state. In that 4-3 ruling denounced by LGBT activists, the court ruled that restricting marriage to a man and a woman doesn’t discriminate against same-sex couples or deny them rights under the state constitution. The court held that the ban on same-sex marriage instead promotes the state’s “interest” in traditional heterosexual marriage as a means of fostering procreation and protecting children.
But Gansler says in his opinion that the appeals court decision should not be a key factor in determining whether Maryland could recognize same-sex marriages from other jurisdictions.
“The Court of Appeals would start from the general principle that a marriage that is valid in the place of celebration remains valid in Maryland,” he said in his opinion. “There are exceptions to that rule if the particular marriage is contrary to a strong state public policy. A statute that limits marriage in Maryland to opposite-sex couples could be said to embody a policy against same-sex marriage.”
However, Gansler noted that the Court of Appeals has not prevented the state from recognizing various types of marriages performed in other states that are not allowed to be performed in Maryland under the state’s marriage law. Among them are common law marriages, which are recognized in many other states. The Court of Appeals also upheld a Rhode Island marriage between an uncle and a niece, even though the Maryland marriage law prohibits such a marriage, Gansler says in his opinion.
“While the matter is not free from all doubt, in our view, the court is likely to respect the law of other states and recognize a same-sex marriage contracted validly in another jurisdiction,” he says. “In light of Maryland’s developing public policy concerning intimate same-sex relationships, the court would not readily invoke the public policy exception to the usual rule of recognition.”
In response to a second question raised by Madaleno, Gansler says in his opinion that Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley does not have authority to issue an executive order recognizing same-sex marriages from other jurisdictions.
In his May 19, 2009, letter to Gansler requesting the same-sex marriage recognition opinion, Madaleno pointed out that New York Gov. David Paterson issued such an order, clearing the way for New York to recognize out-of-state same-sex marriages, even though the legislature had not approved a same-sex marriage bill.
“An executive order of the governor must be consistent with existing Maryland law, as enacted by the General Assembly and construed by the courts,” Gansler says.
LGBT rights groups hailed Gansler’s opinion as an important breakthrough for the marriage equality movement.
“Today is a day to celebrate,” said Morgan Meneses-Sheets, executive director of Equality Maryland, a state LGBT advocacy group.
“Equality Maryland applauds a favorable opinion released by the Office of Attorney General Doug Gansler that states that the marriages of same-gender couples legalized in other jurisdictions have standing to be honored here at home.”
But Rick Bowers, director of Christian Impact Alliance, a Maryland group opposed to same-sex marriage, said Gansler acted without legal authority to issue such a ruling.
“The governing body over a decision like this should be the General Assembly or the people of the state of Maryland through a vote by referendum,” Bowers said.
Gay rights groups, however, disputed Bowers assessment, saying Gansler has authority to issue such an opinion.
Lambda Legal, a national LGBT group, praised Gansler’s opinion for “saying that recognition of out-of-state marriages of same-sex couples is consistent with Maryland law.”
Susan Sommer, director of the group’s Constitutional Litigation program, said the Gansler opinion “should bring some peace of mind to married same-sex couples and their families in Maryland as this state aligns itself with New York, making clear that there is no gay exception to long-standing marriage recognition law.”
Evan Wolfson, executive director of the national same-sex marriage advocacy group Freedom to Marry, said he was confident that the Maryland Court of Appeals would uphold Gansler’s assessment that valid same-sex marriages from other jurisdictions have full legal standing in Maryland.
“Maryland’s typical practice, like all states historically, is to honor marriages rather than destabilize them,” Wolfson said. “The Maryland Attorney General is concluding, looking at Maryland law, that there is no reason for a gay exception to that tradition and common sense practice.”
While praising Gansler’s opinion as an important development for same-sex marriage equality, some LGBT organizations said it focuses attention on the need for all states to adopt same-sex marriage laws.
“Today’s opinion by the Maryland Attorney General only continues to further highlight the burdensome patchwork of unequal laws same-sex couples face across the country,” said Joe Solmonese, president of the Human Rights Campaign. “With every step that is taken in the progress toward full equality, it becomes more and more obvious that separate is not equal and marriage by any other name is not marriage.”
The action by Gansler on Wednesday also comes less than a month after the Maryland House Judiciary Committee voted 12-8 to defeat a bill that would have banned same-sex marriage in the state. The measure was introduced by Del. Emmett Burns (D-Baltimore County), who said he anticipated Gansler’s opinion would back same-sex marriage recognition.
Maryland Del. Don Dwyer (R-Anne Arundel County), meanwhile, is “definitely” moving ahead with plans to file impeachment papers against Gansler for his same-sex marriage recognition opinion, according to spokesperson Louisa Baucom.
“His position about the opinion is that Attorney General Gansler had no right to issue the opinion, regardless of what the opinion is — that his constitutional limitations prohibit that,” Baucom said.
“He will be drawing up letters of impeachment against Attorney General Gansler,” she said, adding that the charges would be based on “violation of his oath of office.”
In an official statement released at the reveal event Capital Pride Alliance described its just announced 2026 Pride theme of “Exist, Resist, Have the Audacity” as a “bold declaration affirming the presence, resilience, and courage of LGBTQ+ people around the world.”
The statement adds, “Grounded in the undeniable truth that our existence is not up for debate, this year’s theme calls on the community to live loudly and proudly, stand firm against injustice and erasure, and embody the collective strength that has always defined the LGBTQ+ community.”
In a reference to the impact of the hostile political climate, the statement says, “In a time when LGBTQ+ rights and history continue to face challenges, especially in our Nation’s Capital, where policy and public discourse shape the future of our country, together, we must ensure that our voices are visible, heard, and unapologetically centered.”
The statement also quotes Capital Pride Alliance CEO and President Ryan Bos’s message at the Reveal event: “This year’s theme is both a declaration and a demand,” Bos said. “Exist, Resist, Have Audacity! reflects the resilience of our community and our responsibility to protect the progress we’ve made. As we look toward our nation’s 250th anniversary, we affirm that LGBTQ+ people have always been and always will be part of the United States’s history, and we will continue shaping its future with strength and resolve,” he concluded.
District of Columbia
Capital Pride board member resigns, alleges failure to address ‘sexual misconduct’
In startling letter, Taylor Chandler says board’s inaction protected ‘sexual predator’
Taylor Lianne Chandler, a member of the Capital Pride Alliance Board of Directors since 2019 who most recently served as the board’s secretary, submitted a letter of resignation on Feb. 24 that alleges the board has failed to address instances of “sexual misconduct” within the Capital Pride organization.
The Washington Blade received a copy of Chandler’s resignation letter one day after she submitted it from an anonymous source. Chandler, who identifies as transgender and intersex, said in an interview that she did not send the letter to the Blade, but she suspected someone associated with Capital Pride, which organizes D.C.’s annual LGBTQ Pride events, “wants it out in the open.”
“It is with a heavy heart, but with absolute clarity, that I submit my resignation from the Capital Pride Alliance Board of Directors effective immediately,” Chandler states in her letter. “I have devoted nearly ten years of my life to this organization,” she wrote, pointing to her initial involvement as a volunteer and later as a producer of events as chair of the organization’s Transgender, Gender Non-Conforming, and Intersex Committee.
“Capital Pride once meant something profound to me – a space of safety, visibility, and community for people who have often been denied all three,” her letter continues. “That is no longer the organization I am part of today.”
“I, along with other board members, brought forward credible concerns regarding sexual misconduct – a pattern of behavior spanning years – to the attention of this board,” Chandler states in the letter. “What followed was not accountability. What followed was retaliation. Rather than addressing the substance of what was reported, officers and fellow board members chose to chastise those of us who came forward.”
The letter adds, “This board has made its priorities clear through its actions: protecting a sexual predator matters more than protecting the people who had the courage to come forward. … I have been targeted, bullied, and made to feel like an outsider for doing what any person of integrity would do – telling the truth.”
In response to a request from the Blade for comment, Anna Jinkerson, who serves as chair of the Capital Pride board, sent the Blade a statement praising Taylor Chandler’s efforts as a Capital Pride volunteer and board member but did not specifically address the issue of alleged sexual misconduct.
“We’re also aware that her resignation letter has been shared with the media and has listed concerns,” Jinkerson said in her statement. “When concerns are brought to CPA, we act quickly and appropriately to address them,” she said.
“As we continue to grow our organization, we’re proactively strengthening the policies and procedures that shape our systems, our infrastructure, and the support we provide to our team and partners,” Jinkerson said in her statement. “We’re doing this because the community’s experience with CPA must always be safe, affirming, empowering, and inclusive,” she added.
In an interview with the Blade, Chandler said she was not the target of the alleged sexual harassment.
She said a Capital Pride investigation identified one individual implicated in a “pattern” of sexual harassment related behavior over a period of time. But she said she was bound by a Non-Disclosure Agreement (NDA) that applies to all board members and she cannot disclose the name of the person implicated in alleged sexual misconduct or those who came forward to complain about it.
“It was one individual, but there was a pattern and a history,” Chandler said, noting that was the extent of what she can disclose.
“And I’ll say this,” she added. “In my opinion, with gay culture sometimes the touchy feely-ness that goes on seems to be like just part of the culture, not necessarily the same as a sexual assault or whatever. But at the same time, if someone does not want those advances and they’re saying no and trying to push you away and trying to avoid you, then it makes it that way regardless of the culture.”
When asked about when the allegations of sexual harassment first surfaced, Chandler said, “In the past year is when the allegation came forward from one individual. But in the course of this all happening, other individuals came forward and talked about instances – several which showed a pattern.”
Chandler’s resignation comes about five months after Capital Pride Alliance announced in a statement released in October 2025 that its then board president, Ashley Smith, resigned from his position on Oct. 18 after Capital Pride became aware of a “claim” regarding Smith. The statement said the group retained an independent firm to investigate the matter, but it released no further details since that time. Smith has declined to comment on the matter.
When asked by the Blade if the Smith resignation could be linked in some way to allegations of sexual misconduct, Chandler said, “I can’t make a comment one way or the other on that.”
Chandler’s resignation and allegations come after Capital Pride Alliance has been credited with playing the lead role in organizing the World Pride celebration hosted by D.C. in which dozens of LGBTQ-related Pride events were held from May through June of 2025.
The letter of resignation also came just days before Capital Pride Alliance’s annual “Reveal” event scheduled for Feb. 26 at the Hamilton Hotel in which the theme for D.C.’s June 2026 LGBTQ Pride events was to be announced along with other Pride plans.
District of Columbia
Capital Stonewall Democrats elect new leaders
LGBTQ political group set to celebrate 50th anniversary
Longtime Democratic Party activists Stevie McCarty and Brad Howard won election last week as president and vice president for administration for the Capital Stonewall Democrats, D.C.’s largest local LGBTQ political organization.
In a Feb. 24 announcement, the group said McCarty and Howard, both of whom are elected DC Advisory Neighborhood Commissioners, ran in a special Capital Stonewall Democrats election to fill the two leadership positions that became vacant when the officers they replaced resigned.
Outgoing President Howard Garrett, who McCarty has replaced, told the Washington Blade he resigned after taking on a new position as chair of the city’s Ward 1 Democratic Committee. The Capital Stonewall Democrats announcement didn’t say who Howard replaced as vice president for administration.
The group’s website shows its other officers include Elizabeth Mitchell as Vice President for Legislative and Political Affairs, and Monica Nemeth as Treasurer. The officer position of secretary is vacant, the website shows.
“As we look toward 2026, the stakes for D.C. and for LGBTQ+ communities have never been clearer,” the group’s statement announcing McCarty and Howard’s election says. “Our 50th anniversary celebration on March 20 and the launch of our D.C. LGBTQ+ Voter’s Guide mark the beginning of a major year for endorsements, organizing, and coalition building,” the statement says.
McCarty said among the organization’s major endeavors will be holding virtual endorsement forums where candidates running for D.C. mayor and the Council will appear and seek the group’s endorsement.
Founded in 1976 as the Gertrude Stein Democratic Club, the organization’s members voted in 2021 to change its name to Capital Stonewall Democrats. McCarty said the 50th anniversary celebration on March 20, in which D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser and members of the D.C. Council are expected to attend, will be held at the PEPCO Gallery meeting center at 702 8th St., N.W.
ACLU sues Kansas over law invalidating trans residents’ IDs
After layoffs at Advocate, parent company acquires ‘Them’ from Conde Nast
Spring into sold
Plan your wedding the LGBTQ way
Calendar: February 27-March 5
Rob Jetten becomes first gay Dutch prime minister
More than a dozen LGBTQ athletes medal at Olympics
New book profiles LGBTQ Ukrainians, documents war experiences
PHOTOS: Queen of Hearts
