News
Gay ambassador reflects on U.S. efforts in Ukraine
Baer talks monitoring mission, being openly gay in negotiations with Russia

Gay U.S. ambassador Daniel Baer is representing U.S. interests during the Ukraine crisis at the Organization for Security & Cooperation in Europe (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key).
Amid the ongoing crisis in Ukraine following Russian President Vladimir Putin’s military incursion into the country, the Obama administration is relying on a gay ambassador to help de-escalate tensions.
Daniel Baer, U.S. ambassador to the Organization for Security & Cooperation in Europe, has in the days since the start of the crisis been working with envoys at the Vienna-based pan-Atlantic international forum to address the situation — in addition to keeping the world updated via his Twitter account.
His priority for the moment is achieving a consensus to allow a OSCE-based monitoring mission to enter Ukraine, although he admits he’s under “no illusion” that will be easy in a body on which Moscow has veto power.
In an interview with the Washington Blade via phone from Vienna after the third emergency meeting at the forum in as many days, Baer described the multi-level approach the United States is undertaking to de-escalate tensions in Ukraine.
“In the past, we’ve seen in other situations where there have been similar concerns raised, a monitoring mission [has worked] by both assessing and reporting facts on the ground and by being there to work to mediate tension and addressing the concerns that have been raised,” Baer said.
But Baer’s participation has significance because he’s openly gay and handling negotiations with a country that is known for enacting anti-LGBT laws and having an anti-LGBT climate.
Nonetheless, Baer, 37, said he’s never felt that his sexual orientation has been an issue for Putin’s representatives at OSCE.
“Just like being gay, working with the U.S. ambassador is not a choice, and I’m ready to work with all of them,” Baer said.
Founded during the Cold War, the OSCE was set up as a forum for the United States and the Soviet Union to speak about concerns and has become a pan-Atlantic forum now comprising 57 European, Asian and North American countries.
After the U.S. Senate confirmed Baer in August as U.S. envoy to OSCE, he relocated to Vienna with his partner of three-and-a-half years Brian Walsh, 27, a physicist now working at an international think-tank on environmental issues.
The transcript of the interview between the Washington Blade and Baer follows:
Washington Blade: How would you characterize the situation in Vienna as the crisis in Ukraine unfolds?
Daniel Baer: I guess a couple things. The OSCE is a big political organization, and an operational entity that has field offices in 16 countries, including Ukraine and many independent institutions that are doing things all the time. So, there’s been kind of two levels of activity.
One, there’s been a sense of urgency in terms of getting the existing capacities of OSCE mobilized to engage in Ukraine, and particularly in Crimea now, in the ways that they can to help de-escalate tension. So, there’s a High Commissioner for National Minorities, the Swiss special envoy who’s the current ambassador to Germany now, but a designated special envoy to Ukraine who sits as the chair of the OSCE right now. The Representative on Freedom of the Media, they just arrived in Crimea a couple hours ago, and then the project office in Kiev is being supplemented.
In addition, because OSCE does arms control, and military transparency, the Ukrainians have invited military monitoring missions. They have an invitation for two military monitors from every participating state in the OSCE.
Then, there’s the political side, and lot of people focus on the downside of the OSCE, which is you operate on consensus. And it’s a big tent that includes the Russian Federation, the United States, Canada and basically everybody in between — and Mongolia. That is both a hindrance, in the sense that it makes consensus harder, but it’s also an asset in the sense that the other project that we’re starting to work on now is trying to develop a mandate for a new special monitoring mission to Ukraine and that will require consensus, but the upside is that if we can find a description of a mandate that works for everyone, it will also have the political value of being blessed by Ukrainians, the Federation, the EU countries, Turkey, ourselves and Canada.
So, it’ll have broad backing. And so, we’re kind of taking the two-pronged approach of mobilize quickly everything that’s already set up and teed up, and ready to go, and also look at this kind of near-to-medium term possibility of setting up a monitoring mission.
That’s something that I’m under no illusions — I think it’s going to be very hard, and really all we can do is tee it up, and leave that door open. And if and when the Russian Federation decides to engage on that and walk through that door, we’ll be ready to work with them.

U.S ambassador to the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) Daniel Baer addresses the media following a meeting. (Photo public domain)
Blade: What makes setting up that monitoring mission “very hard”? I know Moscow has veto power on the OSCE, so how likely is it that we’ll actually see that happening?
Baer: I think the answer is it won’t happen unless Moscow decides that they see value in it, or they think it can be useful. I think our position all along has been there are a variety of concerns that have been raised by the Russian Federation, including concerns about the security of their military base and the human rights of the Russian minority in Crimea, and Ukraine more broadly, etc. There are obviously concerns that are being raised by the Ukrainians themselves about a Russian military incursion on their territory.
But the way to address the concerns that the Russians have raised is not through sending in troops, but through a monitoring mission. And this is an alternative for them. In the past, we’ve seen in other situations where there have been similar concerns raised, a monitoring mission [has worked] by both assessing and reporting facts on the ground and by being there to work to mediate tension and addressing the concerns that have been raised. Yes, they have to choose to take that route instead of the illegal and illegitimate route that they are currently taking, but… one of the ways in which we can make de-escalation more likely is by teeing up that choice, so they can make that choice. …
Blade: Let’s get a little personal. What do you think is the significance of an openly gay person representing U.S. interests in diplomacy with Russia, a country that has passed laws against gay people?
Baer: You know, I think to all of my colleagues when I showed up here in Vienna, most of my colleagues only knew one or two things about me. Everyone knew that I was gay, and the other thing talked about was that I was young. Other than that, they knew that I was an American ambassador. Six months later, it’s certainly more important that I’m the U.S. ambassador than anything else about me, and I have a decent working relationship with all my colleagues.
I have a weekly meeting with the Russian ambassador, and Brian and I have invited him and his wife to the Marine ball along with others. So, we built a working relationship. I guess it would be an interesting question for him. For me, I’m trying to do my job the best I can and represent my country the best I can.
I think one of the strengths that America has is that we increasingly — there’s still work to do on many dimensions — but we increasingly have a diplomatic corps that represents our diversity, and part of that is important because it makes us more effective. Part of that is important because it more accurately represents the country. And it’s super important because part of what others see as valuable and powerful and engaging and attractive about America is the promise of progress toward a society that embraces rights for everyone. I don’t see that as having anything to do with me, per se, but to the extent that there’s a broader story there. I think it’s valuable that we continue to make progress on that front.
Blade: So no Russian officials refused or expressed any reluctance to negotiate with you because of your sexual orientation?
Baer: I have not had any experience where they have refused to engage with me. For some people, whether Russian or otherwise, I’m the first ambassador from the United States that they’ve known was gay and they have to work with. I guess one of the advantages of being the U.S. ambassador in a multi-lateral institution is that it’s pretty hard to be effective and not work with the U.S. ambassador — one way or the other. Just like being gay, working with the U.S. ambassador is not a choice, and I’m ready to work with all of them. And I certainly go into it giving everybody the benefit of the doubt that it isn’t an issue because it shouldn’t be an issue.
Blade: You said they haven’t refused, but have they expressed any reluctance to work with you because of your sexual orientation?
Baer: Not to me. Not to me. If they have, they’ve kept it from me.
Blade: Let’s get back to the bigger picture. Regarding Secretary of State John Kerry’s visit to Ukraine, what impact do you think it’ll have on the situation?
Baer: I think the secretary has actually come and has already arrived in Paris, and will meet with [Russian] Foreign Minister [Sergey] Lavrov in Paris tomorrow. But he spent today in Kiev. I think everybody recognizes that the people of Ukraine have a new temporary government. An election’s declared for May 25. It’s usually important that there is strong support for free and fair elections, and a free and fair campaign environment. Everybody is rightfully focused on the security crisis in Crimea, and also in the rest of the country, there’s a lot of work to do.
And I think the people of Ukraine need to be supported in their efforts to build a prosperous, free, democratic Ukraine. And that’s going to take a lot of support from the international community, and I think Secretary Kerry is going to demonstrate our support for the transition government that is there until the election and our willingness and readiness to help support them in their efforts to build a free, democratic Ukraine.
Blade: How is Kerry being there having an impact as opposed to monitoring the situation from overseas?
Baer: Well, I think, certainly there’s a diplomatic value to it in terms of the conversations that you have, and, of course, it also sends a signal. So if being there sends a signal that the depth of the U.S. commitment and our engagement with the government, I think that signal is an important one to send, particularly at a moment like this.
Blade: What about sanctions? A number of European countries seem reluctant to impose sanctions on Russia. What actually can this administration do to convince its NATO allies and trading partners to get on the program for sanctions with real teeth against Russia?
Baer: Oh, I think the president and Secretary Kerry have had a number of conversations over the last 72 hours and 96 hours with allies and partners in Europe, and I think although the EU has its own function, and we have ours, etc., I think there’s a lot of strong cooperation right now on ways to respond to Russia’s illegal actions…I think there is strong cooperation between the U.S. and the E.U. and individual member states in the E.U. making clear that the Russian incursion and military presence is unacceptable and that they need to go back to their bases, and that it’s up to President Putin to do the right thing and de-escalate the situation.
Blade: Do you see that co-operation extending to an agreement on sanctions with Europe with regard to Russia?
Baer: Like I said, the secretary and president are working very hard to keep our allies and partners appraised of our steps, and to coordinate those. I think those conversations are ongoing, and I think that that strong cooperation will continue.
Blade: What do you think Putin is trying to accomplishment with this incursion? Restoration of the Soviet Union?
Baer: I don’t know. That’s a question for President Putin. I don’t know what he’s trying to accomplish, but certainly the steps that he’s taking are not contributing to stability in the region, to the future of a strong Ukraine, which Russia has everything to gain from as a close neighbor. Russia and Ukraine are going to have a relationship determined by geography if not by partnership, and so Russia has everything to gain from a strong Ukraine. There’s not an either-or choice, and the actions that Mr. Putin have taken are a violation of international law, they’re a violation of many commitments the Russian Federation has made, including here at the OSCE with respect to the sovereignty and territorial integrity of participating states. And they’re a violation of reason, and they are not in Russia’s interest, and certainly not in Ukraine’s.
Blade: What’s your reaction to today’s news that Putin said he sees no reason for Russian forces to intervene in eastern Ukraine at the moment but that Russia “reserves the right to use all means at our disposal to protect” Russian speakers if they are in danger?
Baer: I think I reject the rationale that has been offered for the military incursion and invasion so far, and there’s no defensible rationale for further movement. The right direction for the troops to move is not further, but back to their bases.
Blade: Do you think that comment is troubling?
Baer: Like I said, I think there’s no good rationale for the Russian Federation to have its troops on Ukrainian soil.
Blade: Do you see any scenario in which this crisis will escalate into military engagement involving the United States?
Baer: Nobody wants an escalation into war, so all of our efforts are focused on de-escalating the situation through direct diplomatic engagement and the deployment of an international monitoring force either through the OSCE or the UN. They’re other ways to approach this, but we’re certainly working around the clock to the head in that direction.
Blade: Is it safe to say military engagement is off the table?
Baer: That’s not a question for me.

U.S. ambassador for the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) Daniel Baer with partner Brian Walsh. (Image public domain)
Blade: Let’s get back to some personal stuff. How is the situation with Brian since you’ve moved to Vienna and since the start of his crisis?
Baer: I get to spend far less time with Brian, but other than that it hasn’t changed anything. We’re settling well, and he’s incredibly supportive.
Blade: Do you have any anecdotes about any activities you too had engaged in since you’ve moved to Vienna?
Baer: Well, it’s been a big change because it’s a new country and a new job. And we’ve been skiing in Austria, and that was fun. Being a diplomat overseas is very different from working in the State Department. One of the advantages being here in this post is you have 56 other ambassadorial colleagues and there’s an interesting and diverse group of people to get to know.
We’re settling into that world, and the whole time, we’re very, very much aware of the fact that this is a temporary arrangement. We’re trying to make the most of it. Enjoy the hard work, enjoy the fun and cool parts of the job.
Blade: Let’s get back to Russia. How do you evaluate how Russia handled the Olympics?
Baer: I think we’re all glad that the Olympics came off without any security incidents, etc. I think, as everyone knows, there was a great deal of investment of resources and political attention in the Olympics, and I was proud of U.S. athletes.
Blade: There were reports that were some arrests of demonstrators, including those protesting about LGBT rights. Were you aware of that and do you think they were cause for concern?
Baer: Yes. It’s always of concern when there are arrests of people protesting. In the Russian Federation, unfortunately, it’s not extraordinary. And there were arrests this past weekend of protesters who were protesting Russia’s invasion. Several hundred people were detained, I believe. I should check the reports. And there was a sentence last week of protesters, people who protested in the Bolotnaya Square, protests in 2012. So, Russia’s recent record on freedom of expression and freedom of association and assembly is not encouraging.
Blade: Russia has passed anti-gay laws that were criticized by the international community. Now that the Olympics are over, what is going to happen to LGBT people in Russia?
Baer: I think there are two things. One, we will continue to call out the so-called gay propaganda law and the other laws that have either been proposed or enacted along with it. Obviously, they’re inconsistent with internationally recognized human rights, and that such laws not only affect gay people, but the broader population, and also have a teaching effect, which creates a climate in which the rights of LGBT rights are most likely to be disrespected. We’ve seen an uptick in the kind of vigilante beatings of LGBT people posted online. The climate of intolerance that such laws encourage is something to be deeply concerned about.
That said, I think one of the things that it’s really important to focus on is that it’s not only gay people who have their rights trampled in the Russian Federation. Minorities, migrants from neighboring countries that represent minority populations suffer enormous discrimination, and obviously any Russian citizen has a hard time expressing political views that are critical of the government or joining a peaceful protest. The anti-gay laws are actually happening against a much broader recession on human rights more generally.
Blade: And what do you think is the best way forward to address that by the international community?
Baer: I think first of all, I always start from the premise that lasting change comes from within, so to continue to shine a light on human defenders and advocates who are making the case for change where they are — both LGBT, and more broadly, the human rights defenders and activists — and to call out the cases when their rights are violated. I think making the case to the Russian population more broadly as well to Russian leadership that a strong stable Russian Federation does not come from doubling down on restrictions it comes from democratic progress, including people who have respect for human rights. You have to make the political argument, and you have to call out the failures, and to continue to press, and know that doors will open where you don’t expect them, and you need to be ready to walk through them.
By calling out people’s situations, you remind them that they’re not alone and that they have people who are with them, and, over the long run, you push and you push and you push.
There’s a strong civil society that understands all of the reasons why the backsliding on human rights more broadly is bad for business, and all around it’s bad for Russia, and that trajectory needs to be turned around.
Blade: What about upcoming plans for you and Brian?
Baer: We’re getting married this summer. We haven’t quite figured that out yet because same-sex marriage isn’t legal in Austria, but we’re working on that. But in August.
Federal Government
Republicans attach five anti-LGBTQ riders to State Department funding bill
Spending package would restrict Pride flags on federal buildings, trans healthcare, LGBTQ envoys
As Congress finalizes its funding for fiscal year 2027, Republicans are attempting to include five anti-LGBTQ riders in the National Security and Department of State Appropriations Act.
A rider is an unrelated provision tacked onto a bill that must pass — in this instance, the bill provides funding for national security policy and for the State Department.
The riders range from restricting Pride flags in federal buildings to banning transgender healthcare, but all aim to limit the visibility and rights of LGBTQ Americans.
The five riders are:
Section 7067(a) prohibits Pride flags from being flown over federal buildings.
Section 7067(c) restricts the United States’ ability to appoint special envoys, representatives, or coordinators unless expressly authorized by Congress. These roles have historically been used to promote U.S. interests in international forums — including advancing human and LGBTQ and intersex rights and other policy priorities. The change would halt what the Congressional Equality Caucus describes as providing “critical expertise to U.S. foreign policy and leadership abroad.”
Section 7067(d) reinforces multiple anti-equality executive orders signed by President Donald Trump, effectively requiring that foreign assistance funded by the United States comply with those orders. This includes rescinding federal contractor nondiscrimination protections, including for LGBTQ people.
Section 7067(e) prohibits funding for any organization that provides or promotes medically necessary healthcare for trans people or “promotes transgenderism” — effectively banning funds for organizations that recognize trans people exist. This is despite the practice of gender-affirming care being supported by nearly every major medical association.
Section 7067(g) reinforces two global gag rules put forward by the Trump-Vance administration. One is the Trans Global Gag Rule, which prohibits foreign assistance funding for organizations that acknowledge the existence of trans people or advocate for nondiscrimination protections for them, among other activities. The second is the DEI Global Gag Rule, which prohibits foreign assistance funding for organizations that engage in efforts to address the ongoing effects of racism, sexism, and other forms of bigotry outside the United States.
The global gag rule has its roots in anti-abortion policy introduced by President Ronald Reagan in 1984, when the 40th president barred foreign organizations receiving U.S. global health assistance from providing information, referrals, or services for legal abortion, or from advocating for access to abortion services in their own countries. Planned Parenthood notes that the policy also affects programs beyond abortion, including efforts to expand access to contraception, prevent and treat HIV/AIDS, combat malaria, and improve maternal and child health.
If organizations funded by the State Department engage in these activities, they could lose funding.
This anti-LGBTQ push aligns with broader actions from the Trump-Vance administration since the start of Trump’s second term, which have focused on restricting human rights — particularly those of trans Americans.
The House Appropriations Committee is responsible for drafting the appropriations legislation. U.S. Rep. Tom Cole (R-Okla.) serves as chair, with U.S. Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.) as ranking member. The committee includes 34 Republicans and 27 Democrats.
For FY27 appropriations, Congress is supposed to pass and have the president sign the funding bills by Sept. 30, 2026.
Noticias en Español
The university that refuses to let go
Joanna Cifredo is a trans woman participating in University of Puerto Rico strike
Over the past days, I have been walking with a question that refuses to leave me. Not the kind of question you answer from a desk or from a distance, but one that grows out of what you witness in real time, at the gates, in the faces of those who remain there without knowing how any of this will end. What is truly happening inside the University of Puerto Rico, and why have so many students decided to risk everything at a moment when they can least afford to lose anything.
I write as someone who lives just steps away from the Río Piedras campus. These days, the silence has replaced the constant movement that once defined this space. The absence is felt in every corner where students used to pass at all hours. Since arriving in Puerto Rico three years ago, I have come to know firsthand stories that rarely make it into reports or official statements. One of the reasons I chose to stay was precisely this, to serve the university community, to help create a space where students could find something as basic as a safe meal at night and, in some way, ease burdens that are often carried in silence.
I have listened, asked questions, and tried to understand without imposing answers. What I have found is not a collective outburst or a generational whim. What exists is a fracture, a deep break between those making decisions and those living with their consequences every single day.
There has been an effort to reduce this strike to an issue of order, scheduling, or academic disruption. Conversations revolve around missed classes, delayed semesters, and students supposedly unaware of the consequences of their actions. What is rarely addressed are the conditions that lead an entire student body to pause its own future to sustain a protest that offers no guarantees.
Because that is the reality. These are students who fully understand what they are risking, and yet they remain. When someone reaches that point, the least they deserve is not judgment, but to be heard.
From the outside, there have also been attempts to discredit what is happening. Familiar narratives are repeated, legitimacy is questioned, and doubt is cast over intentions. It is easier to do that than to acknowledge that this did not begin at the gates, but long before, in decisions made without building trust.
And something must be said clearly. This is not limited to the gates of Río Piedras. What we are witnessing extends across every unit of the University of Puerto Rico system. Mayagüez, Ponce, Arecibo, Bayamón, Cayey, Humacao, Carolina, Aguadilla, Utuado, and the Medical Sciences Campus. This is not an isolated reaction. It is a movement that runs through the entire institution. Río Piedras may be more visible, but it is not alone. What is happening there reflects a broader unrest felt across the system.
Within that context, one demand has grown increasingly present, the call for the resignation of University of Puerto Rico President Zayira Jordán Conde. This is not the voice of a small group. It reflects a deeper level of mistrust that has spread across multiple campuses.
The Puerto Rican Association of University Professors has also made it clear that this is not solely a student issue. There is real concern among faculty, and a shared recognition of the conditions currently shaping the university. When students and professors arrive at the same conclusion, the problem can no longer be minimized.
Meanwhile, the administration continues to speak in the language of dialogue. But dialogue is not a word, it is a practice. And when trust has been broken, it cannot be restored through statements alone, but through decisions that prove a willingness to truly listen.
In the midst of all of this, there are voices that cannot be ignored. Voices grounded not in theory, but in lived experience. One of them is Joanna Cifredo, a student at the Mayagüez campus, a young Puerto Rican trans woman, and someone widely recognized for her advocacy.
I spoke with her in recent days. What follows is her voice, exactly as it is.
How would you describe what is happening inside the University of Puerto Rico right now, beyond what people see from the outside?
Estamos viviendo momentos muy difíciles, en el sentido de que hay mucha incertidumbre y una presión constante por parte de la administración para reabrir el recinto, pero, entre todo el caos e inestabilidad provocado por las decisiones de esta administración, también hemos vivido momentos muy poderosos. Esta lucha ha sacado lo mejor de nuestra comunidad.
Lo vimos en las asambleas y plenos, donde 1,500, 1,700, hasta 1,800 estudiantes llegaron —bajo lluvia, bajo advertencias de inundaciones— y aun así se quedaron, participaron y votaron a favor de una manifestación indefinida hasta que se atiendan nuestros reclamos.
He conocido a tantas personas en los diferentes portones, estudiantes graduados, aletas, estudiantes de intercambio, estudiantes de todo tipo de concentraciones y se unieron para apoyar el movimiento estudiantil. Estudiantes que vienen a los portones después del trabajo o antes de trabajar. Estudiantes que vienen a dejar agua y suministros entre turnos de trabajo. Viejitos que vienen a los portones con desayuno, almuerzo o cena.
Más allá de lo que se ve desde afuera, lo que estamos viviendo es una mezcla de tensión y resistencia, pero también de comunidad, solidaridad y compromiso colectivo.
Much of what is discussed remains at the level of headlines or social media. From your direct experience, what specific decisions or actions from the administration have led to this level of mobilization?
Desde el inicio, la designación de la Dra. Zayira Jordán Conde careció de respaldo dentro de la comunidad universitaria. No contaba con experiencia administrativa en la UPR ni con un conocimiento básico de nuestros procesos, cultura y reglamentos. Por eso, en asamblea, el estudiantado votó para solicitarle a la Junta de Gobierno que no considerara su candidatura, y múltiples organizaciones docentes hicieron lo mismo. Existía un consenso amplio de que no tenía la experiencia necesaria para liderar una institución como la nuestra.
A pesar de ese rechazo claro, la Junta de Gobierno decidió ignorar los reclamos de la comunidad universitaria e imponer su nombramiento.
Una vez en el cargo, su estilo de gobernanza ha sido poco transparente y poco colaborativo. Sin embargo, el detonante principal de la movilización en el Recinto Universitario de Mayagüez fue su decisión de destituir, de manera unilateral y en medio del semestre, a cinco rectores, incluyendo al nuestro, el Dr. Agustín Rullán Toro, para reemplazarlo por un rector interino, el Dr. Miguel Muñoz Muñoz.
Esta acción, tomada de forma abrupta, provocó de inmediato un clima de caos e inestabilidad dentro de la institución. Y deja una pregunta inevitable: ¿no anticipó el impacto de esa decisión, lo que evidenciaría una falta de experiencia? ¿O lo anticipó y aun así decidió proceder? No está claro cuál de las dos es más preocupante.
Además, esta decisión tuvo consecuencias concretas para el estudiantado, incluyendo el retiro de becas educativas para nuevos integrantes del RUM por parte de la Fundación Ceiba, que calificó la movida como “sorprendente” y “preocupante”. Decisiones impulsivas como la que tomó la presidenta ponen en peligro la estabilidad de nuestra institución y la acreditación de la universidad.
As a trans woman within this movement, how does your identity intersect with what is happening, and why does this also shape the future of people like you?
Soy una de varias chicas trans que formamos parte activa de este movimiento estudiantil.
For those outside the UPR who believe this does not affect them, what are the real consequences of this crisis?
La Universidad de Puerto Rico se fundó para servir al pueblo.
It is impossible to overstate the role the University of Puerto Rico and its students have played in shaping the social, cultural, and economic life of this country. Its impact extends into science, medicine, and every profession that has sustained Puerto Rico over time. No other educational institution has contributed more.
After listening to her, one thing becomes undeniable. This is not just another protest, but a generation refusing to let go of what little remains within its reach. And when a generation reaches that point, the issue is no longer the strike, the issue becomes the country itself.
District of Columbia
Judge issues revised order in Capital Pride stalking case
Defendant Darren Pasha agreed to accept less restrictive directive
A D.C. Superior Court judge on April 30 reinstated an anti-stalking order requested by the Capital Pride Alliance against local gay activist Darren Pasha based on allegations that Pasha engaged in a year-long effort to harass, intimidate, and stalk the organization’s staff, board members, and volunteers.
The reinstated order by Judge Robert D. Okun followed an April 17 court hearing in which he rescinded a similar order he initially approved in February on grounds that more evidence was needed to substantiate the need for the order.
At the time he rescinded the earlier order he scheduled an evidentiary hearing for April 29 at which three Capital Pride staff members testified in support of the anti-stalking order. But Okun discontinued the hearing after Pasha, who was representing himself without an attorney, announced he was willing to accept a revised, less restrictive temporary restraining order.
The judge said Pasha’s decision to accept a restraining order made it no longer necessary to continue the evidentiary hearing. He then asked Capital Pride and Pasha to submit their suggested revisions for the order which they submitted a short time later.
The case began when Capital Pride Alliance, the D.C.-based LGBTQ group that organizes the city’s annual Pride events, filed a civil complaint on Oct. 27, 2025, against Pasha, accusing him of engaging in a year-long effort to harass, intimidate, and stalk Capital Pride staff, board members, and volunteers. It includes a 167-page addendum of “supporting exhibits” that includes multiple statements by unidentified witnesses.
Pasha, who has represented himself without an attorney, has argued in multiple court filings and motions that the stalking allegations are untrue. In his initial court response to the complaint, he said it appears to be a form of retaliation against him for a dispute he has had with Capital Pride and its former board president, Ashley Smith, who has since resigned from the board.
Similar to his earlier anti-stalking order against Pasha, Okun’s reissued order on April 30 states, a “Temporary Anti-Stalking Order is GRANTED, effective immediately and remaining in effect until further order of the Court or final disposition of this matter.”
It adds, “The defendant shall not contact, attempt to contact, harass, threaten, or otherwise communicate with any protected person, directly or indirectly, including through third parties, social media, electronic communication, or any other means.”
Unlike the earlier order, which did not identify the “protected persons” by name, the latest order includes a list of 34 people, 13 of whom are Capital Pride staff members or volunteers, including CEO Ryan Bos and Chief Operating Officer June Crenshaw. The other 21 people listed are identified as Capital Pride board members, including board chair Anna Jinkerson.
Possibly because Pasha addressed this in his suggested version of the order, the judge’s revised order says Pasha is allowed to visit the D.C. LGBTQ+ Community Center, where the Capital Pride office is located, if he gives the community center a 24 hour advance notice that he will be visiting the center, which hosts many events unrelated to Capital Pride. The earlier order required him to stay at least 100 feet away from the Capital Pride office.
The new order also prohibits Pasha from attending 21 named events that Capital Pride Alliance either organizes itself or with partner organizations that were scheduled to take place from April 30 through June 21. The order says he is allowed to attend the two largest events, the June 20 Pride Parade and the June 21 Pride Festival and Concert, in which 500,000 or more people are expected to attend.
It says Pasha is also allowed to attend the June 15 Pride At The Pier event organized by the Washington Blade.
But for those three events the order says he is restricted from entering “ticketed and controlled access areas.”
At the April 29 court hearing, Okun also scheduled a mandatory remote mediation session for July 23, in which efforts would be made to resolve the civil complaint case brought by Capital Pride without going to trial.
-
Federal Government3 days agoHouse Republicans push nationwide ‘Don’t Say Gay’ bill
-
The White House5 days agoFrom red carpet to chaos: A first-person narrative of the WHCD shooting
-
European Union2 days agoEuropean Parliament backs EU-wide conversion therapy ban
-
News4 days agoLGBTQ people are leaving Orthodox Judaism behind

