Connect with us

News

Reid confident of ENDA’s prospects after Senate vote

GOP House ‘is going to have to capitulate’

Published

on

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid spoke with LGBT reporters at a roundtable Wednesday (photo courtesy Senate Democrats)

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid spoke with LGBT reporters at a roundtable Wednesday (photo courtesy Senate Democrats)

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) maintained on Wednesday that the Employment Non-Discrimination Act would pass Congress, predicting the House “is going to have to capitulate” on the bill to extend workplace discrimination protections to LGBT people.

The Democratic leader addressed ENDA strategy — including prospects for inserting it into the defense authorization bill or a House discharge petition — speaking with a handful of reporters in his office two days after the Senate invoked cloture on the measure, 61-30, saying he expects the chamber to wrap up the legislation by 5 p.m. on Thursday.

Amid concerns that moving the bill in the House would be a non-starter given the Republican leadership’s opposition, Reid said he “wouldn’t be too sure about that.”

“I think the House is going to have to capitulate,” Reid said. “If they have any hope of a president that can be a viable candidate, or they think they can elect some Republicans, and want to hang on to the House, they’ve got issues.”

After saying on the Senate floor Tuesday he thinks the bill would pass the House if it were allowed to come up for a vote, Reid reaffirmed that belief to reporters, saying passage would be “easy.”

“They have five co-sponsors out of like 232; they should be proud of that,” Reid said. “I think virtually all Democrats would vote for that, and you know as well as I do, it’s just a handful of people that they need from Republicans.”

When the Washington Blade noted that one idea for passing ENDA is inserting the language into larger legislation like the defense authorization bill, Reid was dismissive.

Even though the defense bill has passed 52 years in a row, Reid said he’s not sure it can happen this time around given the gridlock in Congress.

Instead, Reid said the better path is to make “one loud chant” to pass the bill along with legislation related to immigration, marketplace fairness, postal reform as well as the farm bill to make the House look like it’s “living in some other world.”

“I think that would be the better way to go, and one that’s realistic,” Reid said. “The other way won’t work.”

Reid said he agreed with comments from House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) that a strategy similar to passing the Violence Against Women Act reauthorization in the Republican-controlled House, which she said made the bill “too hot to handle,” could be pursued with ENDA.

Also, Reid dismissed the idea that a discharge petition could be a way to move the bill in the House.

“Nope, I don’t think so,” Reid said. “When they get close to 218, the speaker backs them off, the Republicans.”

But asked by the Blade whether House intransigence might give President Obama room to issue an executive order prohibiting LGBT discrimination among federal contractors, Reid agreed, saying, “I think that that certainly would be the case.”

Reid recalled that President Obama took executive action to help young, undocumented immigrants who would be eligible for relief under the DREAM Act because Republicans have opposed the bill, saying the situation with ENDA could be similar.

Still, Reid said an executive order from Obama to address LGBT workplace discrimination isn’t his preference.

“I would rather try to get it done legislatively first,” Reid said. “I think that would be my first choice.”

Numerous questions came up during the roundtable about the amendments proposed by Republicans to ENDA.

When a reporter brought up the amendment filed by Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) that would add a national right-to-work provision to ENDA, Reid said he knew what it was even before the measure was explained to him.

Reid said the measure amounted to a “press release” for supporters of right-to-work “right across the river here,” saying “it was just for them.”

But Reid was more understanding of the amendment proposed by Sens. Rob Portman (R-Ohio) and Kelly Ayotte (R-N.H.) to ensure that the government won’t retaliate against religious organizations that invoke the religious exemption in ENDA.

“I believe it was an effort by them to have a reason for joining the bill,” Reid said.

That measure passed by voice vote shortly after Reid spoke to reporters. LGBT advocates have said that language merely reinforces the status quo and makes no substantive change.

Reid also addressed concerns that the religious exemption in ENDA is too broad because it would give religious organizations greater leeway to discriminate against LGBT people than what is allowed under existing law for the protected categories of race, gender and national origin.

“There’s nothing we do that’s perfect,” Reid said. “The goal is to get something passed, move forward. And this allows us to move forward.”

Asked about the lack of Republican opposition on the floor to ENDA on the day of the cloture vote, Reid said it was “just funny.”

“We were told that it was Cruz who would be the one to give the speech,” Reid said. “I find it terribly interesting that Cruz didn’t know what he would say because we found he was willing to talk about anything. He wasn’t willing to do that.”

Sean Rushton, a Cruz spokesperson, said Reid’s assertion that Cruz was supposed to speak against ENDA is “factually inaccurate.” A source said the senator was in the car racing to make the vote and never had any plan to speak.

Faiz Shakir, a Reid spokesperson, insisted in a follow-up response that Democrats saw Rubio point to Cruz on the Senate floor.

“Maybe it was a joke, we don’t know,” Shakir said.

But Reid had more criticism for Cruz. The majority leader said if he didn’t care so much about the country, he’d want Cruz to become the 2016 Republican presidential nominee “because that would end the Republican Party.”

“They have offended everybody,” Reid said. “Over the years, what they have done to African Americans is really hard to comprehend. Now the new people they’re beating up on is Hispanics, women…and lesbian, gays and the other people we have included in this bill.”

Reid also talked about the significance of including transgender protections in ENDA this time around after they were stripped from the bill when the House voted on it in 2007.

“As I’ve grown on this issue, so have the American people,” Reid said. “One time it was a big deal to people who have tried to understand transgender. That held up this legislation for a while. I’m confident of that. To the credit of the HRC, and other groups, when we wanted to move forward without that, they said ‘no.'”

Reid said HRC has told Congress not to pass a gay-only bill, though the organization continued to support the legislation without the transgender protections in 2007. Since then, HRC has supported ENDA only with transgender protections.

Speaking personally about ENDA, Reid mentioned his three adult grandchildren.

“For me to feel any differently about this, they wouldn’t feel proud of their grandfather,” Reid said. “It’s just with my five children, it’s a non-issue, but for my three adult grandchildren, it’s a non-non-non-issue. They can’t imagine why anyone gives a damn.”

Reid disclosed in an earlier conversation with reporters that he had a lesbian niece. Asked whether he had spoken to her since Senate movement on ENDA, Reid said he hadn’t.

“She called me, left a message when we were able to open the government,” Reid said. “She’s, of course, proud of her uncle. But she and I don’t need to dwell on the issue, she’s just like everybody else.”

Reid, a Mormon, was asked by the Blade how he reconciles his faith, which says homosexuality violates God’s law, with his support for gay rights. Reid replied that he’s given a lot to his church and there are Mormons like him who share his views.

“When I attend church here in Washington, D.C., I bet more people agree with me than disagree with me, and so the church is changing, and that’s good,” Reid said.

In the aftermath of ENDA passage in the Senate, Reid said he’d have to hear from the LGBT community on what the next steps should be, but mentioned bullying as a problem over which he shares concern.

“As I was growing up, somebody who was ‘queer’ was really easy to pick on,” Reid said. “I was not in that category, but I saw it happen, and I didn’t do enough to speak out.”

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

Philippines

Philippines Supreme Court rules same-sex couples can co-own property

Advocacy group celebrated landmark decision

Published

on

(Bigstock photo)

The Philippines Supreme Court in a landmark ruling said same-sex couples can co-own property under the country’s Family Code.

The Philippine News Agency on Tuesday notes the court issued its ruling in the case of two women who bought a house in Quezon City, a suburb of Manila, the Filipino capital, before they broke up.

The two women, according to the Philippine News Agency, “agreed to sell the property” after they ended their relationship, “and the registered owner — the respondent — signed a document acknowledging that the other partner paid for half of the purchase and renovations.” The Philippine News Agency notes “the registered owner” later “refused to sell the property and withdrew her earlier acknowledgment of co-ownership, prompting the other partner to file a complaint.”

A Regional Trial Court and the Philippines Court of Appeals ruled against the plaintiff.

The Supreme Court in a 14-page ruling it issued on Feb. 5 overturned the decisions. The Supreme Court published its decision on Tuesday.

“Considering that there is co-ownership between petitioner and respondent, then each co-owner may demand at any time the partition of the thing owned in common, insofar as her share is concerned,” said the Supreme Court in its ruling, according to the Philippine News Agency. “Having rightful interest over the subject property, petitioner has the right to demand the division of the subject property.”

The predominantly Catholic country’s Family Code defines marriage as “a special contract of permanent union between a man and a woman entered into in accordance with law for the establishment of conjugal and family life.” It also states in Article 148 that “in cases of cohabitation” outside of marriage, “only the properties acquired by both of the parties through their actual joint contribution of money, property, or industry shall be owned by them in common in proportion to their respective contributions.”

“In the absence of proof to the contrary, their contributions and corresponding shares are presumed to be equal,” it reads.

The BBC reported the Supreme Court ruling states this provision “applies to all forms of co-habitation,” regardless of the couple’s gender. A Supreme Court press release indicates the decision notes lawmakers and the Filipino government “must address same-sex couples’ rights, as courts alone cannot resolve all related policy concerns.”

“This court does not have the monopoly to assure the freedom and rights of homosexual couples,” it reads. “With the political, moral, and cultural questions that surround the issue concerning the rights of same-sex couples, political departments, especially the Congress must be involved to quest for solutions, which balance interests while maintaining fealty to fundamental freedoms.”

LGBT Pilipinas, a Filipino advocacy group, welcomed the ruling.

“This ruling marks a monumental step forward in the legal recognition of LGBTQ+ families and relationships in the country,” it said in a statement.

LGBT Pilipinas added the ruling “lays a crucial legal foundation for broader recognition of same-sex relationships and strengthens the push for comprehensive anti-discrimination protections.”

“This is a win not only for the LGBTQ+ community, but for fairness and justice in Philippine society as a whole,” said the group.

Continue Reading

Florida

Disney’s Gay Days ‘has not been canceled’ despite political challenges

GayDays is moving forward with its planned LGBTQ meet-up

Published

on

(Photo by Ben Gingell/Bigstock)

Gay Days in Orlando is preparing for its 2026 gathering though organizers have yet to release full details.

Concerns emerged about the status of the annual meetup of LGBTQ people at Walt Disney World in Orlando, Fla., after social media posts and multiple news outlets reported the event would not take place this year.

In response to inquiries from the Blade, Josh Duke, co-owner of Gay Days, clarified that an update would come this week.

“At this time, I’d like to clarify that Gay Days Orlando has not been canceled,” an email to the Blade said. “We are currently finalizing details regarding our plans for 2026 and will be making an official announcement later this week.”

Earlier this week, Gay Days posted about a pause in their plans for the annual meeting, which quickly gained traction online.

In an official statement on social media, Gay Days organizers cited several factors behind what had initially appeared to be a cancellation of their 2026 event.

“Changes to our host hotel agreement, the loss of key sponsorship support, and broader challenges currently impacting LGBTQIA+ events nationwide made it impossible to deliver the experience our community deserves,” organizers wrote. However, the statement added, “This is a pause — not an ending.”

In a longer message shared with supporters, organizers elaborated on that now-reversed decision.

“Gay Days Family — it is with very heavy hearts that we share Gay Days 2026 will not take place this year. This was an incredibly difficult decision and one that was only made after every possible option was explored.

“Gay Days has always been more than an event — it is community, family, and a place where so many memories are made. While this pause is painful, it also gives us the opportunity to step back, listen, and begin shaping a stronger and reimagined GayDays for the future. Thank you for your continued love, patience, and support. This is not goodbye — it’s a reset, and we look forward to creating the future of GayDays together.”

GayDays, which began in 1991, encourages queer Disney fans to visit the Orlando theme park while wearing red shirts to identify one another. Originally focused on gay men reclaiming the childhood joy often denied due to homophobia, the event has expanded over the years to include LGBTQ+ families on summer vacations and queer couples honeymooning in the Magic Kingdom.

Disney made history in 2019 by holding its first-ever official Pride event at its European park, Disneyland Paris. In 2023, Disneyland California hosted the first U.S. official Pride event.

Concerns about the potential cancellation had arisen amid broader challenges affecting LGBTQ events nationwide. These include changes in hotel agreements, sponsorship support, and Florida’s increasingly restrictive anti-LGBTQ policies under Gov. Ron DeSantis. Florida currently has an equality score of -3.00 out of 49 from the Movement Advancement Project, which evaluates states based on policies affecting relationship and parental recognition, nondiscrimination, religious exemptions, LGBTQ youth, healthcare, criminal justice, and transgender identity documentation.

Recent legislation in Florida has included prohibitions on hormone replacement therapy for transgender minors, restrictions on adult access to treatment, bans on drag performances for those under 18, bathroom bans for transgender people in state buildings, and expansion of the Parental Rights in Education Act, commonly called the “Don’t Say Gay” law. These measures limit public school instruction or discussion about sexual orientation and gender identity.

Gay Days Anaheim is scheduled to take place at Disneyland Resort in September.

Disney has also maintained a focus on Pride, reporting in 2022 that proceeds from Pride merchandise benefited numerous LGBTQ organizations, including GLSEN, PFLAG, The Trevor Project, Zebra Coalition, the Los Angeles LGBT Center, the LGBT Center Orange County, the San Francisco LGBT Center, and the Ali Forney Center. Pride merchandise sold internationally supports local LGBTQ organizations in those regions.

More details about this event are expected to be released on Friday.

Continue Reading

New York

Pride flag removed from Stonewall Monument as Trump targets LGBTQ landmarks

The new NPS policy targets Pride flags amid consistent efforts from the Trump administration to minimize LGBTQ history.

Published

on

(Photo courtesy of the National Park Service)

A rainbow Pride flag flying at the Stonewall National Monument in New York was removed at the direction of Trump administration officials at the National Park Service, according to a source familiar with the matter who spoke to the Blade on condition of anonymity.

The source said the move had been in the works for weeks and is part of ongoing efforts by the Trump-Vance administration to erase LGBTQ identity from federally controlled landmarks.

In response to the Blade’s request for information about the new flag policy, the National Park Service provided the following statement:

“Current Department of the Interior policy provides that the National Park Service may only fly the U.S. flag, Department of the Interior flags, and the Prisoner of War/Missing in Action flag on flagpoles and public display points. The policy allows limited exceptions, permitting non-agency flags when they serve an official purpose. These include historical context or reenactments, current military branch flags, flags of federally recognized tribal nations affiliated with a park, flags at sites co-managed with other federal, state, or municipal partners, flags required for international park designations, and flags displayed under agreements with U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services for Naturalization ceremonies.”

The statement also included official guidance on the display of non-agency flags issued by Trump-appointed National Park Service Director Jessica Bowron.

The Blade reached out to other organizations to confirm the status of the Pride flag last week, including the Stonewall National Monument Visitor Center, the NYC Landmarks Preservation Commission, and the National Parks Conservation Association. None were able to provide details about whether the flag was still flying at that time but it has since been removed.

This action aligns with other moves targeting and erasing LGBTQ history. In September, the Blade reported that three organizations originally slated to receive more than $1.25 million from the National Park Service’s Underrepresented Communities Grant Program would no longer receive funding: In Washington, D.C., the Preservation League had been awarded $75,000 to document LGBTQ+ historic resources. In Providence, R.I., the Preservation Society was slated for $74,692 to conduct an LGBTQ+ survey and prepare a National Register nomination. And in New York, the Fund for the City of New York, Inc., had been awarded $32,000 to nominate the residence of Bayard Rustin — the iconic civil rights and LGBTQ activist — as a National Historic Landmark. 

Continue Reading

Popular