Richard Grenell
was appointed spokesperson for the U.S. Ambassador to the
United Nations by President Bush more than seven years
ago and became the longest-serving public servant to
hold that post. But when it came to having his partner
of six years listed alongside the spouses of other
U.N. diplomats, his dedication to the job didn't carry
much weight with the State Department.
Richard Grenell
spent most of his days as spokesperson for the U.S.
Ambassador to the United Nations putting out fires for the
Bush Administration and battling to keep issues like
human rights in Burma and Zimbabwe in the public
spotlight. But after working for the U.S. Mission to
the U.N. for more than seven years, his final media
push was publicizing a more personal struggle
that he fought internally with the State Department.
Grenell, the
longest-serving spokesperson for the U.S. Ambassador whose
final day was Friday, September 26, started inquiring nearly
four years ago about having his partner, Matt Lashey,
listed in what’s known as the United
Nations’ Blue Book, a reference guide of contact
information for different member states of the United
Nations as well as diplomatic personnel and their
spouses.
Though Grenell
and Lashey met in New York and have been together six
years, they cannot legally marry in the Empire State.
“It is not an option for us in New York, but
hopefully someday soon it will be,” he says.
“In my mind, and in Matt's mind, this is it.
We’re married.”
Since the White
House regularly included Grenell's partner by
name on invitations to official events and
parties, Grenell hoped the State Department would
follow suit. He began by approaching the
department appointee tasked with submitting
additions and deletions for the Blue Book with his request
-- the first step in a long line of dead ends. When
the next edition printed and his partner’s name
wasn’t listed, Grenell took it as “a
mess-up.” He made several more failed attempts
to have Lashey added before being told that “it
was a U.N. issue, not a State Department issue.”
“I decided
to investigate on my own,” says Grenell, “find
out who was in charge of the Blue Book at the
U.N.” That led him to the Protocol and Liaison
Service, the department that prints the material, where a
representative informed Grenell that “the U.N. takes
whatever information is given to it by member states
and prints it -- they make no evaluation of the
correctness of the information.”
Indeed, the
inside cover of the Blue Book states: “This
publication is prepared by the Protocol and Liaison
Service for information purposes only. The listings
relating to the permanent missions are based on
information communicated to the Protocol and Liaison Service
by the permanent missions, and their publication is
intended for the use of delegations and the
Secretariat.”
Initially,
Grenell took a measured behind-the-scenes approach to the
situation, but his appeals grew more pointed this past
spring.
“What put
me over the edge was a friend and colleague who met her
spouse after I was already with my partner -- they got
married and subsequently were put into the Blue Book
in a matter of days,” he says.
After numerous
inquiries, Grenell eventually received an e-mail from
Thomas Gallo, a U.S. Mission administrator, on July 25,
stating, “It has been our practice to include
only spouses, when requested by the employee, in our
Blue Book updates, because the Blue Book description
states that it lists ‘spouses’ and because the
Department of State Foreign Affairs Manuel, under the
heading of Members of Household (MOH), indicates that
the Mission may not request privileges, immunities or
exceptions for MOH.”
Privileges and
immunities are a certain set of rights and protections
afforded to employees of different member states of the
United Nations while working in their capacity as a
diplomatic envoy. But Grenell takes issue with the
reasoning that the Blue Book listing bestows any sort of
special status. “I could go down the road and have
the legal discussion about diplomatic immunity and
legal spouses if we were talking about privileges and
immunities,” explains Grenell, “We are not
talking about P & I. We are simply talking about a
reference book the U.N. prints. I find it very hard to
believe that anyone would be adversely affected by
printing Matt’s name.”
Grenell replied
to Gallo’s e-mail reiterating that the Blue Book is
nothing more than a reference and adding, “I want my
partner listed in it. I am formally requesting this
and I want a legal opinion. Please do not delay this
so that we miss the deadline.”
The legal opinion
came via e-mail on July 31 from State Department
attorney Richard Visek, who shelved the discussion of
privileges and immunities and turned his sole focus to
the legal definition of “spouse” as it
was designated by the Defense of Marriage Act. “The
word ‘marriage’ means only a legal union
between one man and one woman as husband and wife, and
the word ‘spouse’ refers only to a person of
the opposite sex who is a husband or a wife,”
Visek wrote, citing U.S. Law, 1 U.S.C. 7. He concluded
the e-mail, “In interpreting the term
‘spouse’, the mission should adhere to
the definition under U.S. law. We also understand that
this is consistent with past practice.”
Click here to follow The Advocate on Twitter.
Page 1 of 2
Eleveld is political editor of The
Advocate.