This Tuesday, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments regarding two cases about transgender girls in sports: Little v. Hecox and West Virginia v. B.P.J. 

In 2020, Idaho Governor Brad Little signed into law HB 500, which bans transgender girls and women from participating in school sports. This affected the first case’s respondent: transgender student athlete Lindsay Hecox, who was barred from participating in the track and cross country teams as well as intramural soccer and running clubs.

In 2021, then-governor of West Virginia, Jim Justice, approved HB 3293, which enacts a similar ban. Becky Pepper-Jackson (B.P.J.), now an incoming high school student, opposed the discriminatory policy when it prevented her from joining her then-middle school’s cross country and track and field teams. Pepper-Jackson has also only undergone female puberty due to gender-affirming care, but West Virginia argues that its anti-transgender policies should be upheld because of her assigned sex at birth. 

For LGBTQ+ advocates and allies, these cases illustrate the burden and harm transgender people face daily as their rights to privacy, dignity, care, and inclusion are constantly at risk of being eroded and stripped completely. 

Experts also wonder if these cases could potentially reshape the Constitution’s Equal Protection Clause as well as the civil rights law, Title IX. The former prohibits discrimination on other factors aside from race, though governments have argued that certain “suspect classifications” can be looked at more closely through “heightened scrutiny.” The latter prohibits sex-based discrimination in federally-funded schools.

What is unfolding and how local advocates are informing change:

The fight ahead is weary, and experts are certain that the states involved will not concede their points. In a webinar organized yesterday by the Williams Institute, several LGBTQ+ policy experts, including Rutgers Law School professor and anti-discrimination scholar Katie Eyer, examined where these cases may be heading, as well as efforts to muddy the arguments. 

“It seems possible that the court might try to sidestep that issue here by saying that these laws don’t target transgender people at all,” Eyer said. “I think for most people, this seems bananas: like an upside-down world. We all know these laws were about transgender people.”

Jenny Pizer, an attorney for the LGBTQ+ civil rights legal organization Lambda Legal and a co-counsel member for the B.P.J. case, affirmed this sentiment at a press conference organized Tuesday by Lambda Legal and AIDS Healthcare Foundation affinity group, FLUX. “They’ve gone to great lengths to say there’s no discrimination,” Pizer said. “[They’re arguing] it’s just technicalities or classifications.” 

Eyer was one of three Equal Protections scholars who filed an amicus brief to be considered in the Supreme Court cases. An amicus brief is a legal document submitted by someone who is not involved directly in a case but who may offer additional perspectives and information that can inform the ruling process. 

Eyer’s brief provided historical context that clarified the disadvantages of blanket sex-based policies. These types of laws, according to Eyer, uphold stereotypes over nuance, truth, and equal protection guidelines. For Pepper-Jackson, who has only undergone female puberty and who does not “benefit” from what dissidents define as a sex-based competitive “advantage,” the state should have provided her the ability to argue that she should have the same rights as other girls. 

“Of course, the state hasn’t done that here,” Eyer said. “Under these precedents, the Supreme Court should invalidate the laws as applied to those trans girls who really don’t have a sex-based competitive advantage.”

Who are these bills protecting?

The states argue that their policies are merely “ensuring safety and fairness in girls’ sports.” But queer advocates understand that this is a veneer for the exclusion of transgender people from society. Forcing trans youth out of sports “does not protect anyone,” according to California LGBTQ Health and Human Services Network director Dannie Ceseňa, who spoke at Tuesday’s press conference.

“It encourages the scrutiny of children’s bodies. It fuels gender policing, and it creates hostile school environments — not safer ones,” said Ceseňa. “Our youth should not inherit a world that treats their existence as a threat.” 

Transgender people are systemically disempowered 

At yesterday’s webinar, Distinguished Visiting Scholar at the Williams Institute Andrew Flores discussed his own amicus brief in support of Pepper-Jackson. The brief highlights the need for “heightened judicial scrutiny” in Pepper-Jackson’s case because the majority of political processes “systemically fail” transgender people. 

For example, the transgender community faces substantial barriers in exercising their voter rights because of voter identification laws and other policies that regulate and define identity. “Even being able to gain access to the franchise is a burden for transgender people,” Flores said. “The court does play an important role there. It can grant legitimacy to arguments…or at least [acknowledge] that these issues are more complicated than maybe how they’ll receive them.” 

What’s next?

Experts are hesitant about where the cases stand. “Bottom line: I don’t know what the court is going to do in these cases. They may send them back down for further development,” Pizer said, who thinks future rulings will not shift more overarching policies regarding transgender rights. “I think they will probably decide based only on laws about sports, not laws more broadly about the rights of trans folks.” 

But whatever is decided, the impacts will trickle down to everyone. While the cases deal specifically with anti-transgender policies, experts warn that LGBTQ+ issues have always been tied to racial, economic, and disability justice. “There’s this looming constitutional campaign to really undermine civil rights,” said Eyer. “That affects LGBTQ people. It affects people of color. It affects people with disabilities. It affects everybody, and it really is concerning.” 

As transgender inclusion and safety are being argued on the largest legal stage, advocates are asking: “When are you going to step up?” They are also sending a direct message to transgender youth: “We see you, we believe in you, and we are fighting for you,” said Ceseňa. “You deserve joy, community, and care. You deserve a future that reflects who you are and not who anyone or any politician demands you to be. Trans youth deserve better.” 

Kristie Song is a California Local News Fellow placed with the Los Angeles Blade. The California Local News Fellowship is a state-funded initiative to support and strengthen local news reporting. Learn more about it at fellowships.journalism.berkeley.edu/cafellows.

Hundreds of supporters and opponents of trans rights gathered outside of the United States Supreme Court during oral arguments for Little v. Hecox and West Virginia v. B.P.J. on Tuesday. Two competing rallies were held next to each other, with politicians and opposing movement leaders at each.

“Trans rights are human rights!” proclaimed U.S. Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) to the crowd of LGBTQ rights supporters. “I am here today because trans kids deserve more than to be debated on cable news. They deserve joy. They deserve support. They deserve to grow up knowing that their country has their back.”

“And I am here today because we have been down this hateful road before,” Markey continued. “We have seen time and time again what happens when the courts are asked to uphold discrimination. History eventually corrects those mistakes, but only after the real harm is done to human beings.”

View on Threads

U.S. Education Secretary Linda McMahon spoke at the other podium set up a few feet away surrounded by signs, “Two Sexes. One Truth.” and “Reality Matters. Biology Matters.”

“In just four years, the Biden administration reversed decades of progress,” said McMahon. “twisting the law to urge that sex is not defined by objective biological reality, but by subjective notion of gender identity. We’ve seen the consequences of the Biden administration’s advocacy of transgender agendas.”

U.S. Rep. Mark Takano (D-Calif.), chair of the Congressional Equality Caucus, was introduced on the opposing podium during McMahon’s remarks.

“This court, whose building that we stand before this morning, did something quite remarkable 6 years ago.” Takano said. “It did the humanely decent thing, and legally correct thing. In the Bostock decision, the Supreme Court said that trans employees exist. It said that trans employees matter. It said that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act protects employees from discrimination based on sex, and that discrimination based on sex includes discrimination based on gender identity and sexual orientation. It recognizes that trans people have workplace rights and that their livelihoods cannot be denied to them, because of who they are as trans people.”

“Today, we ask this court to be consistent,” Takano continued. “If trans employees exist, surely trans teenagers exist. If trans teenagers exist, surely trans children exist. If trans employees have a right not to be discriminated against in the workplace, trans kids have a right to a free and equal education in school.”

Takano then turned and pointed his finger toward McMahon.

“Did you hear that, Secretary McMahon?” Takano addressed McMahon. “Trans kids have a right to a free and equal education! Restore the Office of Civil Rights! Did you hear me Secretary McMahon? You will not speak louder or speak over me or over these people.”

Both politicians continued their remarks from opposing podiums.

“I end with a message to trans youth who need to know that there are adults who reject the political weaponization of hate and bigotry,” Takano said. “To you, I say: you matter. You are not alone. Discrimination has no place in our schools. It has no place in our laws, and it has no place in America.”

U.S. Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Md.) is among those who spoke at an “ICE Out for Good” protest that took place outside U.S. Customs and Border Protection’s headquarters in D.C. on Tuesday.

The protest took place six days after a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent shot and killed Renee Nicole Good, a 37-year-old woman in Minneapolis.

Good left behind her wife and three children.

(Video by Michael K. Lavers)

The Supreme Court heard two cases today that could change how the Equal Protection Clause and Title IX are enforced.

The cases, Little v. Hecox and West Virginia v. B.P.J., ask the court to determine whether state laws blocking transgender girls from participating on girls’ teams at publicly funded schools violates the 14th Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause and Title IX. Once decided, the rulings could reshape how laws addressing sex discrimination are interpreted nationwide.

Chief Justice John Roberts raised questions about whether Bostock v. Clayton County — the landmark case holding that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 protects employees from discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity — applies in the context of athletics. He questioned whether transgender girls should be considered girls under the law, noting that they were assigned male at birth.

“I think the basic focus of the discussion up until now, which is, as I see it anyway, whether or not we should view your position as a challenge to the distinction between boys and girls on the basis of sex or whether or not you are perfectly comfortable with the distinction between boys and girls, you just want an exception to the biological definition of girls.”

“How we approach the situation of looking at it not as boys versus girls but whether or not there should be an exception with respect to the definition of girls,” Roberts added, suggesting the implications could extend beyond athletics. “That would — if we adopted that, that would have to apply across the board and not simply to the area of athletics.”

Justice Clarence Thomas echoed Roberts’ concerns, questioning how sex-based classifications function under Title IX and what would happen if Idaho’s ban were struck down.

“Does a — the justification for a classification as you have in Title IX, male/female sports, let’s take, for example, an individual male who is not a good athlete, say, a lousy tennis player, and does not make the women’s — and wants to try out for the women’s tennis team, and he said there is no way I’m better than the women’s tennis players. How is that different from what you’re being required to do here?”

Justice Samuel Alito addressed what many in the courtroom seemed reluctant to state directly: the legal definition of sex.

“Under Title IX, what does the term ‘sex’ mean?” Alito asked Principal Deputy Solicitor General Hashim Mooppan, who was arguing in support of Idaho’s law. Mooppan maintained that sex should be defined at birth.

“We think it’s properly interpreted pursuant to its ordinary traditional definition of biological sex and think probably given the time it was enacted, reproductive biology is probably the best way of understanding that,” Mooppan said.

Justice Sonia Sotomayor pushed back, questioning how that definition did not amount to sex discrimination against Lindsay Hecox under Idaho law. If Hecox’s sex is legally defined as male, Sotomayor argued, the exclusion still creates discrimination.

“It’s still an exception,” Sotomayor said. “It’s a subclass of people who are covered by the law and others are not.”

Justice Elena Kagan highlighted the broader implications of the cases, asking whether a ruling for the states would impose a single definition of sex on the 23 states that currently have different laws and standards. The parties acknowledged that scientific research does not yet offer a clear consensus on sex.

“I think the one thing we definitely want to have is complete findings. So that’s why we really were urging to have a full record developed before there were a final judgment of scientific uncertainty,” said Kathleen Harnett, Hecox’s legal representative. “Maybe on a later record, that would come out differently — but I don’t think that — ”

“Just play it out a little bit, if there were scientific uncertainty,” Kagan responded.

Justice Brett Kavanaugh focused on the impact such policies could have on cisgender girls, arguing that allowing transgender girls to compete could undermine Title IX’s original purpose.

“For the individual girl who does not make the team or doesn’t get on the stand for the medal or doesn’t make all league, there’s a — there’s a harm there,” Kavanaugh said. “I think we can’t sweep that aside.”

Justice Amy Coney Barrett questioned whether Idaho’s law discriminated based on transgender status or sex.

“Since trans boys can play on boys’ teams, how would we say this discriminates on the basis of transgender status when its effect really only runs towards trans girls and not trans boys?”

Harnett responded, “I think that might be relevant to a, for example, animus point, right, that we’re not a complete exclusion of transgender people. There was an exclusion of transgender women.”

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson challenged the notion that explicitly excluding transgender people was not discrimination.

“I guess I’m struggling to understand how you can say that this law doesn’t discriminate on the basis of transgender status. The law expressly aims to ensure that transgender women can’t play on women’s sports teams… it treats transgender women different than — than cis-women, doesn’t it?”

Idaho Solicitor General Alan Hurst urged the court to uphold his state’s ban, arguing that allowing participation based on gender identity — regardless of medical intervention — would deny opportunities to girls protected under federal law.

Hurst emphasized that biological “sex is what matters in sports,” not gender identity, citing scientific evidence that people assigned male at birth are predisposed to athletic advantages.

Joshua Block, representing B.P.J., was asked whether a ruling in their favor would redefine sex under federal law.

“I don’t think the purpose of Title IX is to have an accurate definition of sex,” Block said. “I think the purpose is to make sure sex isn’t being used to deny opportunities.”

Becky Pepper-Jackson, identified as plaintiff B.P.J., the 15-year-old also spoke out.

“I play for my school for the same reason other kids on my track team do — to make friends, have fun, and challenge myself through practice and teamwork,” said Pepper-Jackson. “And all I’ve ever wanted was the same opportunities as my peers. But in 2021, politicians in my state passed a law banning me — the only transgender student athlete in the entire state — from playing as who I really am. This is unfair to me and every transgender kid who just wants the freedom to be themselves.”

Outside the court, advocates echoed those concerns as the justices deliberated.

“Becky simply wants to be with her teammates on the track and field team, to experience the camaraderie and many documented benefits of participating in team sports,” said Sasha Buchert, counsel and Nonbinary & Transgender Rights Project director at Lambda Legal. “It has been amply proven that participating in team sports equips youth with a myriad of skills — in leadership, teamwork, confidence, and health. On the other hand, denying a student the ability to participate is not only discriminatory but harmful to a student’s self-esteem, sending a message that they are not good enough and deserve to be excluded. That is the argument we made today and that we hope resonated with the justices of the Supreme Court.”

“This case is about the ability of transgender youth like Becky to participate in our schools and communities,” said Joshua Block, senior counsel for the ACLU’s LGBTQ & HIV Project. “School athletics are fundamentally educational programs, but West Virginia’s law completely excluded Becky from her school’s entire athletic program even when there is no connection to alleged concerns about fairness or safety. As the lower court recognized, forcing Becky to either give up sports or play on the boys’ team — in contradiction of who she is at school, at home, and across her life — is really no choice at all. We are glad to stand with her and her family to defend her rights, and the rights of every young person, to be included as a member of their school community, at the Supreme Court.”

The Supreme Court is expected to issue rulings in both cases by the end of June.

On Jan. 12, West Hollywood residents packed the City’s chambers at 6 p.m. to honor the work of outgoing mayor Chelsea Byers and witness councilmembers John Heilman and Danny Hang take their oath of office as they respectively assume their roles as Mayor and Vice Mayor for 2026.

In her last address as Mayor, Byers spoke about the optimism she holds onto in these unsteady times. To her, West Hollywood is a unique City: one that has become a model for what can be possible in an unjust society. “It’s us against the world. It’s West Hollywood on the stage,” Byers said. “It’s our story to tell, and every single person here contributes in such great ways to that.” 

Byers was awarded a plaque on behalf of West Hollywood council members for her outspoken commitment to LGBTQ+ rights, economic justice, housing affordability, and policies that emphasize equity and inclusivity in West Hollywood. 

Her leadership remains a bright, guiding light for Mayor Heilman, who was part of West Hollywood’s first city council after the independent city was incorporated in 1984. The spirit of that initial group remains today: queer, progressive, and led for and by the people. Yesterday’s ceremony marked the beginning of Heilman’s ninth time serving as Mayor, as well as his last year on the city council due to term limits. 

Now, he leads side-by-side with a self-proclaimed “newcomer,” Danny Hang. 

From the 626 to the Westside: Hang’s roots and journey  

Hang was born in Monterey Park, a city in the San Gabriel Valley. The region is known for its diverse communities and AAPI-rich culture and history, and Hang recounted to the Blade the deep sense of belonging and comfort he felt growing up there. “I could go to a restaurant, speak Vietnamese or Chinese,” Hang said. “There are people who look like me out there. It is my home away from home.”

After college, he worked at the Social Security Administration, where he helped retirees, disabled people, and those impacted by loss file for Supplemental Security Income (SSI). The work was fulfilling, and he loved feeling that he had a tangible impact on others’ lives: that he could help residents grappling with difficult bureaucratic processes.

This passion grabbed the attention of L.A. County Supervisor Lindsey Horvath, who tapped Hang into serving on West Hollywood’s Disabilities Advisory Board in 2017. Hang eagerly accepted the role, having always been drawn to the vibrant, queer cultural hub. “WeHo was always the land of the unicorn: the land of magic,’ Hang told the Blade. “[This] was a town where I could be open, by myself, and find other people who were also LGBTQ+.” 

After serving on the City’s Disabilities Advisory Board and, subsequently, the county’s Business License Commission, Hang noticed a lack of AAPI representation in local leadership. “There aren’t many AAPI people at all in West Hollywood. After I was on the commission, [I thought]: Hey, I think I want to run for city council,” Hang told the Blade. 

Creating more inclusive leadership in WeHo

In 2024, Hang was elected to West Hollywood’s city council, becoming the first AAPI councilmember in the City’s 40 year legacy. “I want to see people who look like me in local government, because I want this community to be reflective of the modern-day people who live here. We’re a diverse community, and there’s no reason why we shouldn’t have people of color on the council, as well as more people of color appointed to our boards and commissions.” 

Last night, local officials offered encouragement, support, and affirmation to Hang after he took his oath of office. “You’re already making history and certainly making waves across, not just your home region of the San Gabriel Valley, but certainly in California,” said Monterey Park councilmember Henry Lo. 

Afterwards, Hang addressed the room, thanking residents, fellow council members and his family. “Standing here as the first AAPI elected to the West Hollywood City Council is deeply meaningful, and I couldn’t have done it without my parents. [They’re] right here in the front row,” Hang said. “My dad was a union worker, who showed me why standing up for workers matters. And my mom worked in a small business, owning a little nail salon in South Pasadena. She taught me what it means to care for others and to keep the community going.” 

The year ahead: Heilman calls for residents to unite

Afterwards, Mayor Heilman spoke at length about the upcoming transitional year, the urgency of the current political climate, and ways that community members can step up to support each other. In his last term, he has set his eye on revitalizing the Sunset Strip, stabilizing rent and increasing housing affordability as well as examining the safety of the City’s foundational buildings, including the library and fire station.

He concluded his speech by making an unwavering stance on the “appalling” state of the federal government, stating that every West Hollywood resident must step up together in the face of ongoing federal attacks on the rights of LGBTQ+ people, specifically transgender people, as well as immigrants and other marginalized community members. 

“This is a direct attack on our residents. It’s a direct attack on all of us,” Heilman said. “Now is not the time to hide. We need you…Ask what you can do to help people in the community,” he said, galvanizing residents to volunteer for the City’s various social services, nonprofits like Hollywood Food Coalition and Ascencia. 

This call for unity and communal bravery echoes Byers’ belief in the courage of the people of West Hollywood. “41 years ago, a group of people defined what government could be,” Byers said. “We’re living the wildest dreams of people decades ago…and we get to be a bridge for that hope for the future. In such a critical moment, it’s truly our responsibility.” 

Kristie Song is a California Local News Fellow placed with the Los Angeles Blade. The California Local News Fellowship is a state-funded initiative to support and strengthen local news reporting. Learn more about it at fellowships.journalism.berkeley.edu/cafellows.

Are you or a friend looking to find a little love in 2026? We are looking for the most eligible LGBTQ singles in Los Angeles. Nominate you or your friends until January 23rd using the form below or by clicking HERE.

Our most eligible singles will be announced online in February.

A U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent shot and killed a woman in Minneapolis as she attempted to drive away from law enforcement during a protest on Wednesday.

The Star Tribune newspaper identified the victim as Renee Nicole Good, 37, a Minneapolis resident who lived blocks from where she was shot in the Central neighborhood, according to reports. Donna Ganger, Good’s mother, told the Star Tribune that her daughter lived in the Twin Cities with her wife.

Multiple videos of the shooting have gone viral on social media, showing various angles of the fatal incident — including footage that shows Good getting into her car and attempting to drive away from law enforcement officers, who had their weapons drawn.

In the videos, ICE agents can be heard telling Good to “get out of the fucking car” as they attempted to arrest her. Good, who press reports say was married to a woman, ended up crashing her car into an electric pole and other vehicles. She was later transported from the scene of the shooting and died at the hospital.

President Donald Trump defended the ICE agent on Truth Social, saying the officer was “viciously” run over — a claim that coincides with Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem’s assessment of the situation. Noem, a South Dakota Republican, insisted the officer “fired defensive shots” at Good after she attempted to run over law enforcement agents “in an attempt to kill them — an act of domestic terrorism.”

Multiple state and local officials disputed claims that the shooting was carried out in self-defense at the same time Noem was making those assertions.

An Instagram account that appears to belong to Good describes her as a “poet and writer and wife and mom and shitty guitar strummer from Colorado; experiencing Minneapolis, MN,” accompanied by a rainbow flag emoji.

A video posted to X after the shooting shows a woman, reportedly her wife, sitting on the ground, crying and saying, “They killed my wife. I don’t know what to do.”

“We’ve dreaded this moment since the early stages of this ICE presence in Minneapolis,” Mayor Jacob Frey said during a Wednesday press conference. “Having seen the video myself, I want to tell everybody directly that [the DHS’s claim of self-defense] is bullshit. This was an agent recklessly using power that resulted in somebody dying, getting killed.”

“I have a message for ICE. To ICE, get the fuck out of Minneapolis,” Frey continued. “We do not want you here. Your stated reason for being in this city is to create some kind of safety, and you are doing exactly the opposite. People are being hurt. Families are being ripped apart. Long-term Minneapolis residents that have contributed so greatly to our city, to our culture, to our economy are being terrorized, and now somebody is dead. That’s on you, and it’s also on you to leave.”

Across the Capitol, members of the House and the Senate condemned the actions of the officer.

“There’s no indication she’s a protester, there’s nothing that at least you can see on the video, and therefore nothing that the officers on the ground could see that identify her as someone who’s set out to try to do harm to an ICE officer,” U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) said Wednesday night on MS NOW’s “The Weeknight.”

“There is no evidence that has been presented to justify this killing,” House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) said in a statement on his website. “The masked ICE agent who pulled the trigger should be criminally investigated to the full extent of the law for acting with depraved indifference to human life.”

“ICE just killed someone in Minneapolis,” U.S. Rep. Robert Garcia (D-Calif.) the highest-ranking Democrat on the House Oversight Committee, posted on X. “This administration’s violence against communities across our country is horrific and dangerous. Oversight Democrats are demanding answers on what happened today. We need an investigation immediately.”

In a statement to the Advocate, Human Rights Campaign President Kelley Robinson wrote, “Today, a woman was senselessly killed in Minneapolis during an ICE action — a brutal reminder that this agency and the Trump regime put every community at risk, spreading fear instead of safety. Reports that she may have been part of the LGBTQ+ community underscore how often the most vulnerable pay the highest price.”

National LGBTQ Task Force President Kierra Johnson also responded to Good’s death.

“We recognize and mourn the loss of Renee Nicole Good and extend our condolences to her family, loved ones, and community,” said Johnson in a statement. “This loss of life was preventable and reprehensible, particularly coming at the hands of federal agents.”

BOGOTÁ, Colombia — A gay Venezuelan man who has lived in Colombia since 2018 says he feels uncertain about his homeland’s future after the U.S. seized the now former Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro.

“On one hand I can feel happy, but on the other hand I feel very concerned,” Heberth Aguirre told the Washington Blade on Tuesday during an interview at a shopping mall in Bogotá, the Colombian capital.

Aguirre, 35, is from Maracaibo, Venezuela’s second-largest city that is the heart of the country’s oil industry.

He developed cultural and art initiatives for the Zulia State government.

“Little by little, I suddenly became involved in politics because, in a way, you had to be involved,” recalled Aguirre. “It was necessary to be involved because the regime often said so.”

“I basically felt like I was working for the citizens, but with this deeply ingrained rule we had to be on their side, on the side of the Maduro and (former President Hugo) Chávez regime,” he added.

Maduro in 2013 became Venezuela’s president after Chávez died.

“There are things I don’t support about the regime,” Aguirre told the Blade. “There are other things that were nice in theory, but it turned out that they didn’t work when we put them into practice.”

Aguirre noted the Maduro government implemented “a lot of laws.” He also said he and other LGBTQ Venezuelans didn’t “have any kind of guarantee for our lives in general.”

“That also exposed you in a way,” said Aguirre. “You felt somewhat protected by working with them (the government), but it wasn’t entirely true.”

Aguirre, 35, studied graphic design at the University of Zulia in Maracaibo. He said he eventually withdrew after soldiers, members of Venezuela’s Bolivarian National Guard, and police officers opened fire on students.

“That happened many times, to the point where I said I couldn’t keep risking my life,” Aguirre told the Blade. “It hurt me to see what was happening, and it hurt me to have lost my place at the university.”

Venezuela’s economic crisis and increased insecurity prompted Aguirre to leave the country in 2018. He entered Colombia at the Simón Bolívar Bridge near the city of Cúcuta in the country’s Norte de Santander Province.

“If you thought differently, they (the Venezuelan government) would come after you or make you disappear, and nobody would do anything about it,” said Aguirre in response to the Blade’s question about why he left Venezuela.

Aguirre spoke with the Blade three days after American forces seized Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores, at their home in Caracas, the Venezuelan capital, during an overnight operation.

The Venezuelan National Assembly on Sunday swore in Delcy Rodríguez, who was Maduro’s vice president, as the country’s acting president. Maduro and Flores on Monday pleaded not guilty to federal drug charges in New York.

President Donald Trump on Tuesday in a Truth Social post said Venezuela’s interim authorities “will be turning over between 30 and 50 million barrels of high quality, sanctioned oil, to the United States of America.”

“This oil will be sold at its market price, and that money will be controlled by me, as president of the United States of America, to ensure it is used to benefit the people of Venezuela and the United States,” wrote Trump.

Trump on Sunday suggested the U.S. will target Colombian President Gustavo, a former Bogotá mayor and senator who was once a member of the M-19 guerrilla movement that disbanded in the 1990s.

Petro has urged Colombians to take to the streets on Wednesday and “defend national sovereignty.” Claudia López, a former senator who would become the country’s first female and first lesbian president if she wins Colombia’s presidential election that will take place later this year, is among those who criticized Trump’s comments.

“Let’s be clear: Trump doesn’t care about the humanitarian aspect,” said Aguirre when the Blade asked him about Trump. “We can’t portray him as Venezuela’s savior.”

Meanwhile, Aguirre said his relatives in Maracaibo remain afraid of what will happen in the wake of Maduro’s ouster.

“My family is honestly keeping quiet,” he said. “They don’t post anything online. They don’t go out to participate in marches or celebrations.”

“Imagine them being at the epicenter, in the eye of the hurricane,” added Aguirre. “They are right in the middle of all the problems, so it’s perfectly understandable that they don’t want to say anything.”

‘I never in my life thought I would have to emigrate’

Aguirre has built a new life in Bogotá.

He founded Mesa Distrital LGBTIQ+ de Jóvenes y Estudiantes, a group that works with migrants from Venezuela and other countries and internally placed Colombians, during the COVID-19 pandemic. Aguirre told the Blade he launched the group “with the need to contribute to the general population, not just in Colombia.”

Aguirre met his husband, an American from California, at a Bogotá church in December 2020 during a Christmas event that SDA Kinship Colombia, an LGBTQ group, organized. A Utah judge virtually officiated their wedding on July 12, 2024.

“I love Colombia, I love Bogotá,” said Aguirre. “I love everything I’ve experienced because I feel it has helped me grow.”

He once again stressed he does not know what a post-Maduro Venezuela will look like.

“As a Venezuelan, I experienced the wonders of that country,” said Aguirre. “I never in my life thought I would have to emigrate.”

The Colombian government’s Permiso por Protección Temporal program allows Aguirre and other Venezuelans who have sought refuge in Colombia to live in the country for up to 10 years. Aguirre reiterated his love for Colombia, but he told the Blade that he would like to return to Venezuela and help rebuild the country.

“I wish this would be over in five years, that we could return to our country, that we could go back and even return with more skills acquired abroad,” Aguirre told the Blade. “Many of us received training. Many of us studied a lot. We connected with organizations that formed networks, which enriched us as individuals and as professionals.”

“Returning would be wonderful,” he added. “What we’ve built abroad will almost certainly serve to enrich the country.”

President Trump’s anti-LGBTQ agenda dominated national news in 2025, particularly his cruel attacks on trans Americans. Here are our picks for the top 10 LGBTQ news stories the Blade covered in 2025.

10. Trump grants clemency to George Santos

President Donald Trump granted clemency to disgraced former Long Island Rep. George Santos. Santos was sentenced to 87 months in federal prison after pleading guilty to wire fraud and aggravated identity theft and had served just 84 days of his more than seven-year sentence. He lied to both the DOJ and the House Ethics Committee, including about his work and education history, and committed campaign finance fraud.

9. U.S. Olympics bans trans women athletes  

The United States Supreme Court decided in 2025 to take up two cases — Little v. Hecox and West Virginia v. B.P.J.— both of which concern the rights of transgender athletes to participate on sports teams. The cases challenge state laws under the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment, which prevents states from offering separate boys’ and girls’ sports teams based on biological sex determined at birth. Both cases are set to be heard in January 2026. The developments follow a decision by the United States Olympic & Paralympic Committee to change eligibility rules to prohibit transgender women from competing in women’s sporting events on behalf of the United States, following Trump’s Executive Order 14201, “Keeping Men Out of Women’s Sports.”

8. FDA approves new twice-yearly HIV prevention drug

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration on June 18 approved a newly developed HIV/AIDS prevention drug that needs to be taken only twice a year, with one injection every six months. The new drug, lenacapavir, is being sold under the brand name Yeztugo by pharmaceutical company Gilead Sciences. According to trial data, 99.9 percent of participants who received Yeztugo remained HIV negative. This emerging technology comes amid direct cuts to HIV/AIDS research measures by the Trump–Vance administration, particularly targeting international HIV efforts such as PEPFAR. 

7. LGBTQ people ‘erased’ from gov’t reports

Politico reported in March that the Trump–Vance administration is slashing the State Department’s annual human rights report, cutting sections related to the rights of women, people with disabilities, the LGBTQ+ community, and more. Members of Congress objected to the removal of the subsection on “Acts of Violence, Criminalization, and Other Abuses Based on Sexual Orientation, Gender Identity or Expression, or Sex Characteristics (SOGIESC)” from the State Department’s Annual Country Reports on Human Rights Practices.

In a Sept. 9 letter to Secretary of State Marco Rubio, U.S. Reps. Robert Garcia (D-Calif.), Julie Johnson (D-Texas), and Sarah McBride (D-Del.) urged the department to restore the information or ensure it is integrated throughout each report, noting that the reports serve as key evidence for asylum seekers, attorneys, judges, and advocates assessing human rights conditions and protection claims worldwide.

6. Trump admin redefines ‘sex’ in all HHS programs

The Trump administration canceled more than $800 million in research into the health of sexual and gender minority groups. More than half of the National Institutes of Health grants scrapped through early May involved studies of cancers and viruses that disproportionately affect LGBTQ people.

The administration is also pushing to end gender-affirming care for transgender youth, according to a new proposal from the Department of Health and Human Services, NPR reported. The administration is considering blocking all Medicaid and Medicare funding for services at hospitals that provide pediatric gender-affirming care. “These rules would be a significant escalation in the Trump administration’s attack on access to transgender health care,” said Katie Keith, director of the Center for Health Policy and Law at Georgetown University.

5. FBI plans to label trans people as ‘violent extremists’

The Human Rights Campaign, Transgender Law Center, Equality Federation, GLAAD, PFLAG, and the Southern Poverty Law Center condemned reports that the FBI, in coordination with the Heritage Foundation, may be working to designate transgender people as “violent extremists.” The concerns followed a report earlier this month by independent journalist Ken Klippenstein, who cited two anonymous national security officials saying the FBI is considering treating transgender subjects as a subset of a new threat category.

That classification—originally created under the Biden administration as “Anti-Authority and Anti-Government Violent Extremists” (AGAAVE) — was first applied to Jan. 6 rioters and other right-wing extremists. Advocates said the proposal appears to stem from the false claim that the assassination of Charlie Kirk was committed by a transgender person.

4. Pentagon targets LGBTQ service members

Acting in agreement with the growing anti-LGBTQ sentiment from the Trump administration, during a televised speech to U.S. military leaders at Marine Corps Base Quantico in late September, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth denounced past military leadership for being too “woke,” citing DEI initiatives and LGBTQ inclusion within the Department of Defense. During the 45-minute address, Hegseth criticized inclusive policies and announced forthcoming directives, saying they would ensure combat requirements “return to the highest male standard only.”

Since 2016, a Navy replenishment oiler had borne the name of gay rights icon Harvey Milk, who served in the Navy during the Korean War and was separated from service under other than honorable conditions due to his sexuality before later becoming one of the first openly LGBTQ candidates elected to public office. In June 2025, the ship was renamed USNS Oscar V. Peterson.

The U.S. Air Force also announced that transgender service members who have served between 15 and 18 years would be denied early retirement and instead separated from the military without benefits. Transgender troops will be given the option of accepting a lump-sum payout offered to junior service members or being removed from service.

In February, the Pentagon said it would draft and submit procedures to identify transgender service members and begin discharging them from the military within 30 days.

3. Trump blames Democrats, trans people for gov’t shutdown

Republicans failed to reach an agreement with Democrats and blamed them for the government shutdown, while Democrats pointed to Republicans for cutting health care tax credits, a move they said would result in millions of people paying significantly higher monthly insurance premiums next year. In the White House press briefing room, a video of Democrats discussing past government shutdowns played on a loop as the president continued to blame the Democratic Party and “woke” issues, including transgender people.

“A lot of good can come from shutdowns. We can get rid of a lot of things. They’d be Democrat things,” Trump said the night before the shutdown. “They want open borders. Men playing in women’s sports. They want transgender for everybody.”

2. Supreme Court joins attacks on LGBTQ Americans

The U.S. Supreme Court issued multiple rulings this year affecting LGBTQ people. In Mahmoud v. Taylor (6–3), it ruled that public schools must give parents advance notice and the option to opt children out of lessons on gender or sexuality that conflict with their religious beliefs. The case arose after Montgomery County, Md., schools added LGBTQ-inclusive storybooks to the elementary curriculum.

In June, the court upheld Tennessee’s ban on gender-affirming care for transgender minors, protecting similar laws in more than 20 states. Lawmakers and advocates criticized the ruling, and a coalition of seven medical associations warned it strips families of the right to direct their own health care.

The Court also allowed the Trump administration to enforce a ban on transgender military personnel and to implement a policy blocking passports with “X” gender markers, with the federal government recognizing only male and female designations.

1. Trump inaugurated for second time

President Donald Trump became the 47th president after winning Wisconsin, securing 277 of the 270 electoral votes needed. His guidebook, Project 2025, outlined the Republican Party’s goals under his new leadership, with a particular focus on opposing transgender rights.

Trump nominated openly gay hedge fund executive Scott Bessent as U.S. Treasury Secretary, a role he eventually assumed. Bessent became the highest-ranking openly gay U.S. government official in American history.

Honorable mention: The war on rainbow crosswalks escalates around the country

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) ordered state transportation officials to remove a rainbow-colored crosswalk in Orlando next to the Pulse gay nightclub, where 49 mostly LGBTQ people were killed in a 2016 mass shooting. The move follows a July 1, 2025, announcement by U.S. Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy that, with support from President Trump, the department adopted a “nationwide roadway safety initiative” that political observers say could be used to require cities and states to remove rainbow street crosswalks.

This Thursday, the AIDS Healthcare Foundation (AHF) will march in the highly-anticipated Rose Parade in Pasadena. AHF will present a Jack and the Beanstalk float with the titular character climbing amongst ginormous tomatoes, eggplants, strawberries, and tomato plants. It’s befitting of this year’s parade theme: “The Magic in Teamwork,” which celebrates the power of collective effort and unity. 

The whimsical design also honors the organization’s “Food for Health” program, an initiative that began in 2021 to respond to food insecurity across the U.S. For nearly five years, “Food for Health” has hosted free food pantries and farmers’ markets, providing hot meals and fresh groceries nationally for families and veterans in need of food assistance. 

“Food for Health” was also crucial in the wide-sweeping emergency response various nonprofits were trying to organize after the devastating Palisades and Eaton Fires in January. AHF’s program delivered over 75,000 hot meals to evacuees and Los Angeles Fire Department (LAFD) first responders. 

The float also honors the individuals fueling these on-the-ground efforts, like Janet and Christy Lee, the sisters behind Altadena’s Fair Oaks Burger. For eight months after these major fires broke out, the Lee sisters worked closely with “Food for Health” to host free weekly farmers’ markets in the parking lot of their restaurant to support community members who had been displaced and impacted by the wildfires. 

Both sisters will join fellow local advocates and leaders like labor activist Dolores Huerta, LAFD Captain Thomas ‘Kit’ Kitahata, Champions of Caring Connections executive director Bettye Randle, and “Food for Health” directors Carlos Marroquin and Tara O’Callaghan as riders on the AHF float. 

The Rose Parade begins at 8 a.m. on Thursday morning, marching through 5 miles of Colorado Blvd. Now in its 137th year, the parade’s inaugural event was held in 1890 and continues to delight local residents and usher in the new year with illustrious musical performances and grand floats. More information about tickets and parade guidelines can be found on Pasadena’s Tournament of Roses website.

Kristie Song is a California Local News Fellow placed with the Los Angeles Blade. The California Local News Fellowship is a state-funded initiative to support and strengthen local news reporting. Learn more about it at fellowships.journalism.berkeley.edu/cafellows.