National
GOP in last ditch effort to block ‘Don’t Ask’ repeal?
McCain denies dropping START support over gay ban
Gay rights supporters continue to express optimism that the Senate is on its way to repealing “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” as Republican senators have reportedly threatened to withdraw support from a nuclear arms reduction treaty if a vote on the miltary’s gay ban proceeds as planned.
According to Congressional Quarterly, Sens. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) have said they would no longer support the START Treaty if Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) proceeds with a vote on “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” and the DREAM Act, an immigration-related bill.
Reid on Thursday night filed cloture on the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal legislation as well as the DREAM Act. The vote on “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” could come as soon as Saturday if the Senate fails to invoke cloture first on the DREAM Act.
On the Senate floor, Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) predicted the treaty’s failure if the chamber moves onto what he called “partisan, political, issues, brought forth to basically accommodate activist groups around this country,” presumably referring to “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” and immigration.
“I’m hoping that those will be taken down or else I don’t think the future of the START treaty over the next several days is going to be successful, based on what I’m watching,” Corker said.
On the Senate floor, McCain seemed to distance himself from Corker and dispute the reporting that he and Graham were basing their support for the START Treaty on other measures that were coming to the floor.
“There continues to swirl allegations that there is going to be a vote for it or against it because of another piece of legislation or for other reasons — for other political reasons,” McCain said. “I reject that allegation.”
Brooke Buchanan, a McCain spokesperson, said via e-mail to the Washington Blade, that the assertions that McCain is threatening to withdraw support from the START Treaty over “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” are “not true.”
“McCain will base his support on START on the merits of the Treaty and if his concerns regarding Missile Defense have been addressed,” Buchanan said.
Graham’s office didn’t respond on short notice to the Blade’s request for comment on the issue.
An informed source said Congressional Quarterly is standing by its reporting in the article.
The START Treaty has been a priority for the White House in the lame duck session of Congress and support from McCain and Graham is seen as essential to reaching the 67-vote threshold necessary to ratify the treaty.
The reported ultimatum offered by Republicans senator could put the White House and Democratic leadership in the difficult position of having to choose between the two agenda items.
Still, the plan seems to be to continue with “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal as planned. Regan Lachapelle, a Reid spokesperson, said Senate leadership intends to hold a vote Saturday as announced Thursday.
A White House spokesperson didn’t respond on short notice to a request for comment on whether the reported threats from Republicans would disrupt plans for “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”
Optimism over ‘Don’t Ask’ vote
Amid these reported threats, supporters of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal said prospects look good for the Senate vote and pledged to keep up the pressure until Congress finishes the job.
Sen. Joseph Lieberman (I-Conn.), the sponsor of the stand-alone bill, said he’s “very optimistic” the legislation will pass the Senate and noted the bill currently has more than 50 co-sponsors.
“But we know it ain’t over till it’s over and until all the votes are counted,” Lieberman said.
Aubrey Sarvis, executive director of the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network, also predicted the Senate will vote to repeal “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” on Saturday.
“I believe senators will do that,” Sarvis said. “I think we’re going to have a good weekend, and I just want to say we are delighted to be here after 17 years having this historic opporunity. I believe we’re on the brink of victory in the next day or two.”
To increase pressure on the Senate, gay troops who were discharged under “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” and who are affiliated with SLDN are pledging to sit in the Senate gallery until the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal vote is taken.
Sarvis said these service members have come to the Senate to say they’re going to stay here until the Senate repeals “‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”
“So between now and adjournment, these service members and others like them — somewhere between two and 10 each hour — will be in the Senate galleries until the Senate acts,” Sarvis said.
Anthony Woods, an Army Iraq war veteran who was discharged in 2008, said during the news conference that implementation of open service in the U.S. military would have no impact on battle effectiveness.
“My soldiers didn’t care about anyone’s sexual orientation,” Woods said. “I was an armor officer, so we were on tanks in some of the toughest of parts of Iraq and it didn’t matter one bit what someone’s sexual orientation was.”
During the news conference, other lawmakers who have worked to repeal “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” railed against the gay ban as they called for an end to the law.
Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) said she thinks “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” is “unconstiutional” as she commended gay service members for serving under “difficult circumstances.”
“I want to thank you for your dedication and commitment despite such difficulties and despite such requirements that, I think, fundamentally, are not only unfair and unconstitutional, but in violation of who we are as Americans,” Gillibrand said.
Many gay rights advocates have been calling on President Obama to declare “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” unconstitutional so he could discontinue enforcement of the law.
A vote for final passage normally takes place 30 hours after the Senate invokes cloture on a bill, but Lieberman said a final vote could take place on the same day if cloture is invoked and the Senate has unanimous consent to move forward ahead of time.
“I hope that we may reason together and decide to yield back some time and perhaps get to final passage tomorrow before the end of the day.”
If all 57 senators who voted in favor of the motion to proceed last week on the fiscal year 2011 defense authorization bill vote to invoke cloture on the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” legislation, only three more votes would be needed to reach the 60-vote threshold necessary to move forward with the bill.
Lieberman has said Sen. Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark.), who didn’t vote this month on the defense authorization bill, would vote in favor of the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” stand-alone bill. Sens. Scott Brown (R-Mass.), Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) and Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) have also indicated they would support the stand-alone bill, which should bring the vote tally up to 61.
Still, SLDN has included Sen. Kent Conrad (D-N.D.) on its list of senators whom repeal supporters need to pressure before the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” vote. If Conrad votes “no” or takes a walk, his action could put the repeal bill right at the 60-vote threshold neeeded to go forward — or even below that threshold if there are any surprises.
During the news conference, Lieberman declined to elaborate on what he believed Conrad’s position was on “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” and said he’d let the North Dakota senator speak for himself.
“I think you’ll have to talk to him,” Lieberman said. “Let’s say for now, I’m confident that got more than 60 votes.”
Conrad’s office didn’t respond on short notice to a request to comment on how the senator would vote on “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”
Amendments not an issue for ‘Don’t Ask’ bill
Debate over amendments had previously been an issue with the fiscal year 2011 defense authorization bill to which “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” was attached, which failed to pass in the Senate earlier this month, but that doesn’t seem to be a factor in the vote on the standalone repeal legislation.
Many Republican senators said they voted “no” on the defense authorization bill because they didn’t feel the amendment process for the legislation was fair to the minority party.
For the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” legislation, Reid has “filled the tree” and is not permitting amendments on the bill to ensure that the legislation the Senate approves will be identical to the measure passed earlier this week by the House.
Lachapelle said the cloture vote on “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” is “an opportunity for senators to show where they stand on the issue.”
“Amendments at this point would only serve to kill the bill,” she said.
Even though senators who expressed support for “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” have previously voted “no” on the defense authorization bill based on concerns on the amendment process, Lieberman said no senators who have been supportive said they would vote “no” based on amendment on the standalone bill.
In fact, Lieberman said two senators — Sens. Susan Collins (R-Maine) and Lisa Murkowksi (R-Alaska) — confirmed they would vote in favor of the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” bill even with no amendments.”
“Although both of them wanted their to be a number of amendments allowed on the defense authorization bill, they said that was very different because it was a big bill, 900 pages — there ought to be a free and reasonable debate,” Lieberman said. “The repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” I think, at this point is four or five pages.”
Lieberman said both Collins and Murkowski indicated that opponents of repeal “will have full opportunity to speak against it, but we ought not to give people the opportunity to delay it further or try to pass an amemdment that effectively kill the bill.”
Federal Government
Markwayne Mullin confirmed as next DHS secretary
Okla. senator to succeed Kristi Noem
The U.S. Senate confirmed Markwayne Mullin as the next secretary of Homeland Security on Monday, as the agency continues to grapple with what lawmakers have described as a “never-ending” funding standoff, with Democrats attempting to withhold funding from one of the nation’s largest and most costly agencies.
Mullin — a Republican senator from Oklahoma, former mixed martial arts fighter, and plumbing business owner — was confirmed in a 54–45 vote. Two Democrats — U.S. Sens. John Fetterman (D-Pa.) and Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.) — sided with Republicans in supporting his confirmation.
The new agency head is expected to follow the policy direction set by President Donald Trump, emphasizing stricter immigration enforcement. This includes proposals to support immigration agents at polling sites and to cut funding to so-called “sanctuary cities.”
Mullin replaces Kristi Noem, who was fired earlier this month following a widely scrutinized 2-day congressional hearing on Capitol Hill.
During the hearing, Noem faced intense questioning over her response to several crises, including the fatal shooting of two American citizens in Minneapolis by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents, a $220 million border security advertising campaign that featured her on horseback near Mount Rushmore amid one of the largest federal workforce reductions in U.S. history, and the federal response to major natural disasters such as the July 2025 Texas floods and Hurricane Helene in 2024.
Noem had previously drawn criticism for a series of policy decisions in South Dakota that broadly focused on restricting the rights of LGBTQ individuals. In 2023, she signed House Bill 1080, banning gender-affirming medical care for transgender minors. She also signed legislation and executive orders restricting trans athletes’ participation in women’s sports, as well as the state’s “Religious Freedom Restoration Act,” which critics argued enabled discrimination against LGBTQ individuals. Additionally, the state canceled contracts related to LGBTQ support services — including suicide prevention and health care navigation programs‚ and later agreed to a $300,000 settlement with trans advocacy group, The Transformation Project.
Despite her removal from DHS, Noem will remain in the Trump-Vance administration as a special envoy for the “Shield of the Americas,” an initiative aimed at promoting U.S. influence in the Western Hemisphere, including efforts to counter cartel networks, reduce Chinese influence, and manage migration.
The new head of DHS has served in Congress since 2013, in both houses of the federal legislature. While in the Senate and a member of the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) Committee, Mullin has been a vocal critic of policies aimed at expanding LGBTQ inclusion. He led a group of lawmakers in urging the Administration for Community Living to reverse a rule requiring states to prioritize Older Americans Act services based on sexual orientation and gender identity, arguing the policy could have unintended consequences.
Mullin also makes history as the first Native American — and a citizen of the Cherokee Nation — to lead the Department of Homeland Security. He was also among the 147 Republicans who voted to overturn the 2020 presidential election results despite no evidence of widespread fraud, and was present in the U.S. House of Representatives chamber on Jan. 6.
Federal Government
Protesters say SAVE Act targets voters, transgender youth
Bill described as ‘Jim Crow 2.0’
Members of Congress, advocates, and people from across the country gathered outside the U.S. Capitol on Tuesday to protest proposed federal legislation that voting rights activists have deemed “Jim Crow 2.0.”
The Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act would amend the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 to require in-person proof of citizenship for anyone seeking to vote in U.S. elections.
President Donald Trump has also pushed for the proposed legislation to include a section that would ban gender-affirming medical care for transgender minors, even with parental consent, and prohibit trans people from participating in school or professional sports consistent with their gender identity rather than their sex assigned at birth.
In addition to changing voter registration requirements, the bill would limit acceptable forms of identification to documents such as a birth certificate or passport — records that the Brennan Center for Justice estimates more than 21 million Americans do not have — effectively restricting access to the ballot. It would also ban online voter registration, DMV voter registration efforts, and mail-in voter registration.
A 2021 investigation by the Associated Press found that fewer than 475 people voted illegally or improperly, a tiny fraction of the estimated 160 million Americans who voted in the 2020 election.
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) spoke at the event.
“It will kick millions of American citizens off the rolls. And they don’t even require you to be told,” the highest-ranking Democrat in the Senate told protesters and reporters outside the Capitol. “If this law passes — and it won’t — you’re gonna show up in November … and they’ll say… sorry, you’re no longer on the voting rolls.”
He, like many other speakers, emphasized the bill in the context of American history, pointing to what he described as its racist roots and its impact on Black and brown Americans.
“I have called this act, over and over again, Jim Crow 2.0 … because they know it’s the truth.”
U.S. Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.) was one of the lawmakers leading opposition to the legislation and spoke at the rally.
“It’s not just voting rights that are on the line — our democracy is on the line,” the California lawmaker said. “It’s not a voter I.D. bill. It’s a bait and switch bill.”
He added historical context, noting the significance of voting rights legislation passed more than 60 years ago. In 1965, Alabama civil rights activists marched to protest barriers to voter registration. Alabama state troopers violently attacked peaceful demonstrators at the Edmund Pettus Bridge in Selma, using tear gas, clubs, and whips against more than 500 — mostly Black — protesters.
“61 years ago — not to the day — but this week, President Lyndon Johnson came to the Capitol and addressed a joint session of Congress in the wake of Bloody Sunday and pushed Congress to pass the Voting Rights Act,” Padilla said. “61 years later, Donald Trump and this Republican majority wants to take us backwards. We’re not gonna let that happen.”
U.S. Sen. Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.) also spoke, emphasizing that he views the effort as a Republican-led and Trump-backed attempt to restrict voting access, particularly among Black, brown, and predominantly Democratic communities.
“President Trump told Republicans when they were meeting behind closed doors that ‘The SAVE Act will guarantee Republicans win the midterms and ensure they do not lose an election for 50 years,’” Luján said. “The first time I think Donald Trump’s been honest … This voter suppression bill is only that. Taking away vote by mail? I hope my Republican colleagues from states that voted for Donald Trump or where vote by mail is popular have the courage and the backbone to stand up and say no to this nonsense, because their constituents are going to push back.”
U.S. Sen. Lisa Blunt Rochester (D-Del.) also spoke.
“Our Republican colleagues have already cut Medicaid, Medicare, people don’t know how they’re gonna be able to afford energy,” she said, providing context for the broader political moment. “We’re in the middle of a war that they can’t even get straight while we’re in it and don’t have a way to get out of it. And we are now faced with defending our democracy?”
She then showed the crowd something that she said has been with her throughout her political journey in Washington.
“I brought with me something that I carried on the day that I was sworn into the House of Representatives when I was elected in 2016, and I carried it with me on the day that I was sworn in as United States senator. And I also carried it with me when I was trapped up in the gallery on Jan. 6 and all I could think to do was pray … This document allowed my great great great grandfather, who had been enslaved in Georgia, to have the right to vote. We took this and turned it into a scarf. It is the returns of qualified voters and reconstruction code from 1867. This is my proof of what we’ve been through. This is also our inspiration.”
“I got to travel between the Edmund Pettus Bridge two times. And even as I thought about this moment, I recognized that while we wish we weren’t in it, while we don’t know why we’re in it, I do know we were made for it … So I came today to tell you that, um, just like the leader said, that he calls it Jim Crow 2.0. I call it Jim Crow 2.NO.”
Kelley Robinson, president of the Human Rights Campaign, the largest LGBTQ advocacy organization in the U.S., also spoke, highlighting the impact of the bill’s proposed provisions affecting trans people.
“This bill is not about saving America. This bill is about stealing an election. This bill is about suppressing voters,” Robinson said. “This bill not only tries to disenfranchise voters that deserve their right to vote, it also tries to criminalize trans kids and their families … It tries to criminalize doctors providing medically necessary care for our trans youth.”
The SAVE Act passed the U.S. House of Representatives on Feb. 11 but has not yet been considered in the U.S. Senate.
Idaho
Idaho advances bill to restrict bathroom access for transgender residents
HB 752 passed in state House of Representatives on Monday
The Idaho House of Representatives passed House Bill 752 on Monday, a measure that would make it a crime for a person to use a bathroom other than the one designated for their “biological sex.”
The story was first reported by the Idaho Capitol Sun after the bill cleared the House.
House Bill 752 would make it a criminal offense — either a misdemeanor or a felony, depending on the number of prior offenses — for individuals who “knowingly and willfully” enter a bathroom or changing room designated for the opposite sex.
The bill would apply to public buildings, including government-owned spaces, and places of “public accommodation,” a category that includes private businesses.
According to the bill’s text, it would “prohibit a person from entering a restroom or changing room designated for the opposite sex; provide a penalty; provide exceptions; define terms; and declare an emergency and provide an effective date.”
A first offense would be a misdemeanor, punishable by up to one year in prison. A second or subsequent offense within five years would be a felony, punishable by up to five years in prison.
The bill passed in a 54–15 vote on Monday. Six Republicans broke with their party’s majority to join nine Democrats in opposing the measure.
The bill’s sponsor, state Rep. Cornel Rasor, a Republican from Sagle near the Washington-Idaho border, told House lawmakers that the legislation is intended to protect women and girls.
“It prevents discomfort and voyeurism escalation and assaults, while preserving single-user options and narrow exceptions so no one is denied access for emergency aid,” Rasor said.
State Rep. Chris Mathias, a Democrat from Boise, disagreed, arguing that the legislation would unfairly target transgender Idahoans.
“The truth of the matter is — and I know a lot of people don’t want to say it — but forcing people who don’t look like the sex they were assigned at birth, or transgender folks, to use other people’s bathrooms is going to put a lot of people in danger,” Mathias said.
The Idaho American Civil Liberties Union made a statement about the bill following its passage.
“Idaho lawmakers continue pushing these harmful, invasive bathroom laws, yet cannot present credible evidence that transgender people using gender-aligned bathrooms threaten public safety,” the Idaho ACLU said. “The bill does nothing to address real criminal acts, such as sexual assault or voyeurism, and disregards concerns from law enforcement about the burden enforcement would place on local resources.”
In addition to human rights advocates, who have spoken out against similar bills advancing in state legislatures across the country, Idaho law enforcement groups have also opposed the measure. They argue that the way the legislation is written would “pose significant practical enforcement challenges,” noting that officers are tasked with maintaining public safety — not conducting gender checks or policing bathroom access.
During a committee hearing last week, law enforcement representatives and several trans Idahoans testified that the bill would make many residents less safe.
“Officers responding to a complaint would be placed in the difficult position of determining an individual’s biological sex in order to enforce the statute,” Idaho Fraternal Order of Police President Bryan Lovell wrote. “In many circumstances, there is no clear or reasonable way for officers to make that determination without engaging in questioning or investigative actions that could be viewed as invasive and inappropriate.”
The Idaho Sheriffs’ Association requested that lawmakers amend the bill to require that individuals be given an opportunity to leave a bathroom immediately before facing potential prosecution.
The bill now heads to the Idaho Senate for consideration. To become law, it must pass both chambers and avoid a veto from the governor.
A separate bathroom bill, House Bill 607, which would be enforced through civil lawsuits, passed the House last month but has not yet received a committee hearing in the Senate.
Markwayne Mullin confirmed as next DHS secretary
Gay man murdered in Va.
Trans Day of Visibility events planned
Virginia General Assembly’s 2026 legislative session ends
Polish court rules country must recognize same-sex marriages from EU states
Queer American in Israel discusses Iran war’s impact
‘How We Survived’ panel set for March 25
Calendar: March 21-26
Small is beautiful: subcompact SUVs
