National
White House protesters appear in court
Judge questions prosecution of LGBT demonstrators in ‘Don’t Ask’ case

A U.S. District Court judge told a federal prosecutor in court on Friday that the government appeared to be invoking an overly harsh charge against 13 LGBT activists who were arrested for handcuffing themselves to the White House fence last November to protest the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” law.
In a status hearing at the U.S. courthouse in D.C., Judge Magistrate John M. Facciola said the government’s decision to charge the protesters with a misdemeanor offense that carries a maximum penalty of six months in jail seemed out of keeping with other non-violent civil disobedience cases that involve the arrest of protesters.
Facciola noted that attorneys representing the 13 activists — including former Army Lt. Dan Choi and former Army Staff Sgt. Miriam Ben-Shalom – have called for a trial of each of the defendants unless the government agrees to a less serious charge. A trial for 13 people would cost the government a considerable amount of money and would take up court time that could better be used for other cases, the judge said.
“We think the judge was telegraphing very clearly that he sees the case very similar to the way we see this case — as a civil rights exercise, as a First Amendment exercise as people who non-violently expressed their opposition to a policy which has now been repealed,” said defense attorney Mark Goldstone after the hearing.
Goldstone said Assistant U.S. Attorney Angela George, the prosecutor in the case, has so far declined to consider a number of possible alternative charges proposed by the defense. Among them is a less serious disorderly conduct charge that falls under D.C. law rather than the current federal charge filed against the defendants: failure to obey a lawful order by U.S. Park Police.
Park Police, which patrol the space surrounding the White House, made the arrests in the case after the protesters handcuffed themselves to the fence in front of the White House on Pennsylvania Ave., N.W.
George cited various reasons why the government chose not to accept the suggested options offered by Goldstone and attorney Ann Wilcox, who is assisting Goldstone in the defense. Among other things, she said technical and legal restrictions would likely prevent the government form filing other charges.
Goldstone and Wilcox have proposed, among other things, a “post and forfeit” option that allows the defendants to pay a fine and calls for the charge to be dropped. The two also proposed that the defendants be charged with another misdemeanor offense that allows the government to drop the charge if they successfully perform community service work.
According to the two attorneys, all these options have been used in numerous past cases involving non-violent civil disobedience arrests. Goldstone noted that Choi and another LGBT protester who were arrested for handcuffing themselves to the White House fence in an earlier protest last year were offered a post and forfeit option.
He said that while the judge would not likely issue a six-month sentence if the defendants pled guilty to the current charge, a guilty plea to such a charage would result in them having a permanent criminal record. A criminal record could result in at least two of the defendants, including Ben Shalom, losing their jobs as teachers, he said.
“For some unknown reason, they are taking a harder line in this case,” Goldstone told reporters after the hearing.
Facciola directed George to continue to negotiate with the defense on a possible alternate charge or course of action. He scheduled a follow-up status hearing for May 17. If no agreement is reached by then he directed the parties to return to court on Sept. 19 for either the start of a trial or a plea to an agreed upon charge.
A spokesperson with the U.S. Attorney’s office said Monday that the office would have no comment on the case while is pending in court.
In addition to Choi and Ben-Shalom, the other defendants in the case include former Petty Officer Autumn Sandeen, former Cadet Mara Boyd, former Maine Corps Sgt. Justin Elzie, former Army Arabic linguist Ian Finkenbinder, Marine combat veteran Crpl. Evelyn Thomas and Army veteran Rob Smith.
Others include Robin McGehee, co-founder of GetEqual, the direct action LGBT group that organized the White House protest; Dan Fotou, GetEqual’s eastern regional field director; Fr. Geoff Farrow, a Catholic priest who was suspended by Catholic authorities in California for defending the state’s same-sex marriage law against Proposition 8; Scott Wooledge, an LGBT rights advocate and blogger; and Michael Bedwell, a longtime LGBT activist and friend of Leonard Matlovich, the late LGBT activist and former Air Force sergeant who became the first known gay to publicly declare his sexual orientation in 1975 to challenge the military’s ban on gay service members.
U.S. Supreme Court
Supreme Court to consider bans on trans athletes in school sports
27 states have passed laws limiting participation in athletics programs

The U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday agreed to hear two cases involving transgender youth challenging bans prohibiting them from participating in school sports.
In Little v. Hecox, plaintiffs represented by the ACLU, Legal Voice, and the law firm Cooley are challenging Idaho’s 2020 ban, which requires sex testing to adjudicate questions of an athlete’s eligibility.
The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals described the process in a 2023 decision halting the policy’s enforcement pending an outcome in the litigation. The “sex dispute verification process, whereby any individual can ‘dispute’ the sex of any female student athlete in the state of Idaho,” the court wrote, would “require her to undergo intrusive medical procedures to verify her sex, including gynecological exams.”
In West Virginia v. B.P.J., Lambda Legal, the ACLU, the ACLU of West Virginia, and Cooley are representing a trans middle school student challenging the Mountain State’s 2021 ban on trans athletes.
The plaintiff was participating in cross country when the law was passed, taking puberty blockers that would have significantly reduced the chances that she could have a physiological advantage over cisgender peers.
“Like any other educational program, school athletic programs should be accessible for everyone regardless of their sex or transgender status,” said Joshua Block, senior counsel for the ACLU’s LGBTQ and HIV Project. “Trans kids play sports for the same reasons their peers do — to learn perseverance, dedication, teamwork, and to simply have fun with their friends,” Block said.
He added, “Categorically excluding kids from school sports just because they are transgender will only make our schools less safe and more hurtful places for all youth. We believe the lower courts were right to block these discriminatory laws, and we will continue to defend the freedom of all kids to play.”
“Our client just wants to play sports with her friends and peers,” said Lambda Legal Senior Counsel Tara Borelli. “Everyone understands the value of participating in team athletics, for fitness, leadership, socialization, and myriad other benefits.”
Borelli continued, “The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit last April issued a thoughtful and thorough ruling allowing B.P.J. to continue participating in track events. That well-reasoned decision should stand the test of time, and we stand ready to defend it.”
Shortly after taking control of both legislative chambers, Republican members of Congress tried — unsuccessfully — to pass a national ban like those now enforced in 27 states since 2020.
Federal Government
UPenn erases Lia Thomas’s records as part of settlement with White House
University agreed to ban trans women from women’s sports teams

In a settlement with the Trump-Vance administration announced on Tuesday, the University of Pennsylvania will ban transgender athletes from competing and erase swimming records set by transgender former student Lia Thomas.
The U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights found the university in violation of Title IX, the federal rights law barring sex based discrimination in educational institutions, by “permitting males to compete in women’s intercollegiate athletics and to occupy women-only intimate facilities.”
The statement issued by University of Pennsylvania President J. Larry Jameson highlighted how the law’s interpretation was changed substantially under President Donald Trump’s second term.
“The Department of Education OCR investigated the participation of one transgender athlete on the women’s swimming team three years ago, during the 2021-2022 swim season,” he wrote. “At that time, Penn was in compliance with NCAA eligibility rules and Title IX as then interpreted.”
Jameson continued, “Penn has always followed — and continues to follow — Title IX and the applicable policy of the NCAA regarding transgender athletes. NCAA eligibility rules changed in February 2025 with Executive Orders 14168 and 14201 and Penn will continue to adhere to these new rules.”
Writing that “we acknowledge that some student-athletes were disadvantaged by these rules” in place while Thomas was allowed to compete, the university president added, “We recognize this and will apologize to those who experienced a competitive disadvantage or experienced anxiety because of the policies in effect at the time.”
“Today’s resolution agreement with UPenn is yet another example of the Trump effect in action,” Education Secretary Linda McMahon said in a statement. “Thanks to the leadership of President Trump, UPenn has agreed both to apologize for its past Title IX violations and to ensure that women’s sports are protected at the university for future generations of female athletes.”
Under former President Joe Biden, the department’s Office of Civil Rights sought to protect against anti-LGBTQ discrimination in education, bringing investigations and enforcement actions in cases where school officials might, for example, require trans students to use restrooms and facilities consistent with their birth sex or fail to respond to peer harassment over their gender identity.
Much of the legal reasoning behind the Biden-Harris administration’s positions extended from the 2020 U.S. Supreme Court case Bostock v. Clayton County, which found that sex-based discrimination includes that which is based on sexual orientation or gender identity under Title VII rules covering employment practices.
The Trump-Vance administration last week put the state of California on notice that its trans athlete policies were, or once were, in violation of Title IX, which comes amid the ongoing battle with Maine over the same issue.
New York
Two teens shot steps from Stonewall Inn after NYC Pride parade
One of the victims remains in critical condition

On Sunday night, following the annual NYC Pride March, two girls were shot in Sheridan Square, feet away from the historic Stonewall Inn.
According to an NYPD report, the two girls, aged 16 and 17, were shot around 10:15 p.m. as Pride festivities began to wind down. The 16-year-old was struck in the head and, according to police sources, is said to be in critical condition, while the 17-year-old was said to be in stable condition.
The Washington Blade confirmed with the NYPD the details from the police reports and learned no arrests had been made as of noon Monday.
The shooting took place in the Greenwich Village neighborhood of Manhattan, mere feet away from the most famous gay bar in the city — if not the world — the Stonewall Inn. Earlier that day, hundreds of thousands of people marched down Christopher Street to celebrate 55 years of LGBTQ people standing up for their rights.
In June 1969, after police raided the Stonewall Inn, members of the LGBTQ community pushed back, sparking what became known as the Stonewall riots. Over the course of two days, LGBTQ New Yorkers protested the discriminatory policing of queer spaces across the city and mobilized to speak out — and throw bottles if need be — at officers attempting to suppress their existence.
The following year, LGBTQ people returned to the Stonewall Inn and marched through the same streets where queer New Yorkers had been arrested, marking the first “Gay Pride March” in history and declaring that LGBTQ people were not going anywhere.
New York State Assemblywoman Deborah Glick, whose district includes Greenwich Village, took to social media to comment on the shooting.
“After decades of peaceful Pride celebrations — this year gun fire and two people shot near the Stonewall Inn is a reminder that gun violence is everywhere,” the lesbian lawmaker said on X. “Guns are a problem despite the NRA BS.”
-
U.S. Supreme Court2 days ago
Supreme Court to consider bans on trans athletes in school sports
-
Out & About2 days ago
Celebrate the Fourth of July the gay way!
-
Virginia2 days ago
Va. court allows conversion therapy despite law banning it
-
New York5 days ago
Two teens shot steps from Stonewall Inn after NYC Pride parade