News
HHS falsely blames Obama amid outrage over anti-trans memo
Error-filled statement seeks to skirt responsibility for controversy

HHS issued an error-filled statement in response to outrage over an anti-trans memo. (Photo by Sarah Stierch; courtesy Wikimedia Commons)
Under fire for a reported anti-trans plan that would eliminate federal protections for transgender people, the Trump administration is pushing back in defense of its enforcement of the law — but with a statement that is filled with errors and blames the Obama administration for undercutting transgender rights.
Caitlin Oakley, an HHS spokesperson, said the department has no comment on “alleged, leaked documents,” which the New York Times reported Sunday was being spearheaded by the Department of Health & Human Services and would restrict the definition of “sex” under federal law to biological gender.
In defense of current policy, Oakley blamed the Obama administration for enforcement of the law excluding transgender status from the definition of “sex.”
“The Obama administration’s broad definition of ‘sex’ was enjoined by a federal court on a nationwide basis in December 2016 and the Obama administration did not appeal,” Oakley said. “That court found that the Obama administration regulation was overbroad and inconsistent with the text of the 1972 Title IX law prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sex. The court order remains in full force and effect today and HHS is bound by it as we continue to review the issue.”
Oakley also asserted HHS continues to apply the law fairly and enforces all laws under its purview against discrimination.
“Everyone deserves to be treated with respect and HHS’s Office for Civil Rights will continue to vigorously enforce all laws as written and passed by Congress, prohibiting discrimination in healthcare on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, sex, age and disability,” Oakley added.
For starters, the response appears to conflate two separate rulings in 2016 from U.S. District Judge Reed O’Connor in Texas, although both rulings were against transgender rights.
The part about a ruling in December 2016 seems to reference O’Connor’s decision against an Obama-era regulation interpreting Section 1557 of the Affordable Care Act, which bars sex discrimination in health care, to prohibit bias against transgender people, including refusal of gender reassignment surgery.
But the part about Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 appears to reference another anti-trans decision from O’Connor in July 2016 barring the Obama administration from enforcing its guidance requiring schools to allow transgender kids to use the restroom consistent with their gender identity.
In either event, the response makes incorrect statements about the Obama administration’s role in these lawsuits and falsely accuses the previous White House of supporting the decisions.
If the statement was intended to reflect the Obamacare ruling, the decision to refuse to appeal the preliminary injunction rests solely with the Trump administration. The deadline for the Justice Department to appeal the decision was March 2017, when U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions was the running the show. At that time, no action was taken.
Josh Block, a senior staff attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union, affirmed the decision to let the Obamacare ruling stand rested with the Trump administration, not the Obama administration.
“The Trump administration made the decision not to appeal,” Block said. “The PI decision came down just before New Year’s Eve in December 2016, and the federal government had 60 days to file an appeal.”
Sharon McGowan, chief strategy officer for Lambda Legal and former Obama administration official for the Justice Department, said not appealing O’Connor’s anti-trans decision in health care “was a decision ultimately made by Trump’s Justice Department” and compared it to the Trump administration’s action in the Title IX case.
“Even if a protective notice of appeal had been filed during the last weeks of the Obama administration, that appeal could have been pulled, just as Jeff Sessions pulled DOJ’s appeal challenging the nationwide injunction to the transgender student guidance on his second day on the job,” McGowan said.
If the statement was intended to reflect the Title IX ruling, the Justice Department under U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch, although the Trump administration later reversed those decisions.
The Obama administration filed a notice of appeal on Oct. 20, 2016, and later asked O’Connor to reconsider the nationwide application of his order.
On Sessions’ second day as attorney general in February 2017, the Justice Department rescinded the request for a more limited ruling. Two months later, the Justice Department dropped the appeal before the U.S. Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals entirely.
Jon Davidson, legal director for Freedom for all Americans, affirmed the “Obama administration did appeal Judge O’Connor’s preliminary injunction ruling” in the Title IX case contrary to HHS’s statement, but added the notion the order remains in force “also is a lie.”
“The same day that the Fifth Circuit dismissed the appeal, the plaintiff states that filed the Texas v. U.S. case dismissed their case because the Trump administration withdrew the Obama administration policy and guidance that the states were suing over,” Davidson said. “As expressly stated in the Notice of Voluntary Dismissal filed by the plaintiff states this dismissal ‘necessarily dissolved’ the preliminary injunction, which is no longer in effect.”
McGowan said the Justice Department overall has acted in ways that serve to bolster its interest when judges issue anti-LGBT decisions consistent with the Trump administration’s policy.
“The fact is this Department of Justice had no interest in appealing Judge O’Connor’s ruling [on health care] because it is aligned with their own ideology and policy preferences, as evidenced by the fact that within 48 hours of assuming the position of attorney general, Jeff Sessions pulled the plug on a DOJ appeal from a different Judge O’Connor ruling that prevented the Department of Education from protecting transgender students nationwide,” McGowan said.
Regardless of which case HHS was referencing, the blame on the Obama administration seems likely an attempt to shift responsibility to someone else for the underlying outrage over the anti-trans memo reported in the New York Times, which has nothing to do with any anti-trans decision from the courts. (In fact, the memo is contrary to at least eight federal appeals court rulings and 35 trial court rulings finding the definition of “sex” under federal law applies to transgender status, according to the National Center for Transgender Equality.)
Davidson said whomever is advising the Trump administration on transgender rights “appears to have as tenuous connection to the truth as they do to the law, sound public policy and the facts regarding transgender people.”
“HHS’s blaming the Obama administration and their reliance on a terribly flawed and now dissolved preliminary injunction that was and remains in conflict with the overwhelming majority of federal courts which have held that, properly construed, Title IX protects transgender students is shocking,” Davidson said. “Although it is hard for anything the current Departments of Justice, Education, or Health and Human Services do or say on LGBTQ issues to surprise me anymore, this manages to, and it is appalling.”
Federal Government
Advocates push back on proposed FCC warning labels
New rating system public notice seeking comments issued on April 22
The Federal Communications Commission is considering a new rating system that would require a warning label to appear before any television content that includes LGBTQ+ characters.
On April 22, the FCC issued a public notice asking Americans to submit comments on whether the TV Oversight Management Board should create new TV ratings to alert viewers to “transgender and gender nonbinary programming” and “the discussion or promotion of gender identity themes.”
This proposed warning would appear before content, similar to warnings that explain a program contains sexual content, drug use, or violence — categories that Congress explicitly included in the Telecommunications Act of 1996 on the grounds of obscenity and violence that some parents “believe is harmful to their children.”
The public notice says that “recently, parents have raised concerns that controversial gender identity issues are being included or promoted in children’s programs without providing any disclosure or transparency to parents.”
It goes on to say that not having a warning for trans and nonbinary people is “undermining the ability of parents to make informed choices for their families.”
LGBT Tech is an organization that works to provide LGBTQ+ representation in mainstream media or entertainment. The group notes 81 percent of trans respondents it surveyed said these representations had a positive impact on them discovering or learning about their identity.
“These numbers reflect a basic truth: for many people, and especially young people, seeing LGBTQ+ lives represented in ordinary media is not harmful. It is formative, affirming, and often lifesaving.”
Since the public notice’s publication, more than 40 organizations have come out against the proposed alert.
GLAAD President Sarah Kate Ellis issued a statement in May on the proposal, highlighting what she described as a concerted effort by the Trump-Vance administration to other trans and nonbinary people.
“The FCC does not set TV ratings, but under this administration the FCC has repeatedly tried to control what Americans can see on their own televisions. This government overreach is dangerous and a threat to our community and our democracy,” Ellis said.
“LGBTQ+ people and their families deserve to see their lives represented in the media they watch. And media companies must have the freedom to create programming that appeals to their viewers and subscribers without interference from a government pursuing its own anti-LGBTQ+ political agenda.”
Human Rights Campaign President Kelley Robinson pointed out that this is an act of politically motivated policy, not one based on any rhyme or reason.
“LGBTQ+ stories matter and deserve to be told, seen, and heard,” Robinson said. “The Trump administration does not get to use the FCC to try and erase us simply because they want to pretend to live in a world where we don’t exist. This is a brazen form of political interference that will hurt the ability of all people to appreciate, understand, and learn about the world and people around them.”
Brian Dittmeier, director of LGBTQI+ equality at the National Women’s Law Center Action Fund, echoed Robinson’s concerns that this is attempted censorship for the sake of political gain.
“The FCC is cloaking itself in purported concern for parents in an attempt to censor content, intimidate industry, and silence depictions of our trans siblings and neighbors,” Dittmeier wrote. “The FCC is overstepping its authority to undermine the existing ratings system, which is well understood by parents and enjoys broad public support. The FCC’s presumption that it knows better does not reflect parents’ priorities and reeks of government overreach.”
PFLAG National Vice President of Policy and Government Affairs Diego Sanchez said this is federal government overreach into censorship — something the First Amendment protects against.
“The FCC has given us yet another example of what ‘small government’ means: small enough to fit in your living room; to interrupt family movie night; small enough to make home feel unsafe,” Sanchez said. “Parents and families with transgender loved ones in particular know too well how big government actions impact their families directly, because they feel those impacts before everyone else.”
This proposed warning follows a slew of other federal actions targeting trans people in America, including Executive Order 14168, “Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government,” which mandated that only sex assigned at birth be used on federal government documents regardless of gender identity, as well as broad-based restrictions on gender-affirming care, particularly for trans minors.
Politics
From the desk of Equality California: The legal issues hitting California and beyond this Pride Month
EQCA shares the local and state political developments that affect LGBTQ+ people across California
Happy Pride Month! This year, we’re excited to Rise Up in community to celebrate queer joy and continue fighting back against attacks on LGBTQ+ people. Equality California will be present at several Pride events throughout the state — including West Hollywood and Los Angeles — so stop by and say hello if you see our table!
Or even better, come volunteer with us! For all things Pride 2026, visit our EQCA x Pride page.
To read more stories and sign up for the weekly Equality Brief, visit eqca.org/equalitybrief.
- Anti-Trans Sports Ban Fails to Qualify for November Maine Ballot:
Maine’s Secretary of State announced that a proposed ban on transgender athletes playing sports would not appear on the November ballot following the discovery of signature fraud that disqualified thousands of petitions. The group spearheading the initiative, Protect Girls Sports in Maine, has filed an appeal with the Secretary of State’s office. Similar anti-trans sports ballot initiatives in states like Missouri and Nevada may still make their states’ ballots, pending signature verification. - Federal Judge Renews Preliminary Injunction Preventing Transgender Female Inmates From Transfer to Male Prisons:
U.S. District Judge Royce C. Lamberth once again blocked the Trump administration’s efforts to transfer transgender women in federal custody into male prisons. The case at hand, Doe v. Blanche, was brought in January 2025 after three transgender women incarcerated in federal prison sued over an executive order mandating the federal government only recognize “sex assigned at birth.” - Barney Frank, First Out Gay U.S. Congressman, Dies at 86:
Barney Frank, who represented Massachusetts in the U.S. House of Representatives from 1981-2013, died on May 19 after a prolonged bout with congestive heart failure. Elected to Congress in 1980 following a tenure in the Massachusetts House, Frank came out publicly in 1987, the first Congressman to do so voluntarily. In 2012 he became the first incumbent member of Congress to marry someone of the same sex. While Frank is recognized as a pioneer in politics, many took issue with his more recent statements encouraging Democrats to step away from focusing on issues affecting the transgender community. - Trump State Department Rings Death Knell for Global HIV Prevention Program:
The Department of State has announced that it will end CDC support of PEPFAR (President’s Emergency Plan For AIDS Relief) by September 30 of this year. The program, launched with bipartisan support by President George W. Bush in 2003, has saved the lives of over 26 million people in poor countries living with HIV. PEPFAR had previously suffered a blow in 2025 when the Trump administration dismantled USAID (U.S. Agency for International Development), upending other HIV initiatives in several countries. Critics warn this action could lead to a backslide in prevention and treatment of HIV/AIDS. - Trevor Project Releases Latest LGBTQ+ Youth Mental Health Report:
The Trevor Project has released its 2025 U.S. National Survey on the Mental Health of LGBTQ+ Young People, which surveyed 16,000 LGBTQ+ youth ages 13-24 across the U.S. The findings show that rates of suicidality and risks of self-harming behavior have increased over the past year in large part due to growing anti-LGBTQ+ sentiment, particularly from the federal government. Among the key findings, 36% of LGBTQ+ youth say they seriously considered attempting suicide in the past year.
If you or someone you know is an LGBTQ+ young person in need of support, text ‘START’ to 678-678 to be connected to a trained counselor from The Trevor Project for 100% confidential, 100% free help. - Federal Appeals Court Hears Arguments Over Forcibly Outing Trans Students on School Trips:
A panel of the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals heard arguments in a case challenging a Colorado school district’s policy that allows transgender students to room with peers that share their gender identity. The Alliance Defending Freedom, a notoriously anti-LGBTQ+ legal organization, brought the case on behalf of two parents who sued the Jefferson County Public School District after learning their daughter had shared a hotel room with a transgender girl during a 2023 Washington, D.C. trip. The district’s attorneys argue that any change in policy would single out transgender students for unfair and unequal treatment. - Texas Hospital, DOJ Reach $10 Million Settlement With Disturbing Caveat:
The Department of Justice announced on May 15 that it had reached a $10 million settlement with Texas Children’s Hospital in relation to its provision of transition-related care for minors. While the settlement was reached out of court, with neither party admitting wrongdoing, part of the agreement mandates that the hospital revoke privileges for any physicians involved in providing such care, and also requires the creation of a so-called “detransition clinic.” Both actions stand to have a chilling effect on transgender healthcare providers nationwide.
STATE LEGISLATIVE UPDATE
All of our 2026 priority sponsored bills, with the exception of AB 2014 (Elhawary) — Challenging Unfair Gender Bias in Criminal Trials, moved out of the Appropriations Committee’s “suspense file,” on May 14 alongside hundreds of other measures.
Following that, all Equality California priority legislation passed the “house of origin” deadline on May 29, 2026 — meaning that the bills successfully cleared a floor vote of the full chamber where they were initially introduced. The bills now await scheduling for policy committee hearings in opposite chambers.
To view our entire 2026 state legislative package, visit eqca.org/legislation
UPCOMING EVENTS
Want to join Equality California at an upcoming Pride festival, or march alongside us in a parade? Visit our Mobilize page to see all the events we’re a part of this June!
Our Pride Parties return this summer as we gather in community and celebrate Pride 2026! Rise Up and join us at an event near you! Tickets are on sale now!
Los Angeles: Wednesday, June 10 @ Hi Tops Los Feliz, 6:00-9:00 PM
San Francisco: Tuesday, June 23 @ El Rio, 6:00-9:00 PM
San Diego: Tuesday, July 14 @ InsideOUT, 6:00-9:00 PM
Hungary
Hungarian authorities lift Budapest Pride ban
Country’s new government took office last month
Hungarian police on May 29 announced they will allow the annual Budapest Pride march to take place.
“The Budapest Metropolitan Police has approved the 2026 Budapest Pride Parade and also has issued restrictive orders in relation to three counter-demonstrations,” a Budapest Metropolitan Police spokesperson told Politico.
Budapest is Hungary’s capital and largest city.
Hungarian lawmakers last year passed a bill that banned Pride events and allowed authorities to use facial recognition technology to identify participants. MPs later amended the Hungarian constitution to ban public LGBTQ+ events.
More than 100,000 people defied the ban and participated in last year’s Budapest Pride parade. The event became one of the largest protests against then-Prime Minister Viktor Orbán and his government since he took office in 2010.
Prime Minister Péter Magyar took office last month after his center-right Tisza party ousted Orbán’s Fidesz-KDNP coalition in elections that took place on April 12. The European Union’s top court, the EU Court of Justice, days after Orbán’s ouster struck down Hungary’s anti-LGBTQ+ propaganda law that MPs approved in 2021.
The EU on May 29 announced it will release more than €16 billion ($18.59 billion) in funds to Hungary that it withheld while Orbán was in office.
The Budapest Pride march will take place on June 27.
“We will march freely in fresh air for our rights, for the democratic Hungary,” said Budapest Pride on its Facebook page.
Colombia
Claudia López comes up short in Colombian presidential election
Former Bogotá mayor would have been country’s first lesbian head of government
Former Bogotá Mayor Claudia López on Sunday finished fifth in the first round of Colombia’s presidential election.
López, a centrist who ran as an independent, received 225,517 votes. This figure is .95 percent of the total votes cast.
López was the Colombian capital’s mayor from 2020-2023. She was a member of the Colombian Senate from 2014-2018. López, whose wife is outgoing Colombian Sen. Angélica Lozano, would have become the country’s first female and first lesbian president if she would have won the election.
The LGBTQ+ Victory Institute honored López in D.C. in 2024.
“We need to listen to each other again, we need to have a coffee with each other again, we need to touch each other’s skin,” she told the Los Angeles Blade during an interview. She hadn’t yet declared her candidacy, and did not specifically discuss her plans to run.
Runoff to take place June 21
Abrelardo de la Espriella, a far-right lawyer who has praised U.S. President Donald Trump and Salvadoran President Nayib Bukele, on Sunday finished first with 43.74 percent of the vote. Senator Iván Cepeda, a member of outgoing President Gustavo Petro’s Historic Pact party, came in second with 40.9 percent of the vote.
Neither men received a majority of votes. A runoff between them will take place on June 21.
Politics
Out Rep. Mark Takano recalls fight against the religious right
“We must be unrelenting in the struggle for equality,” says Takano
U.S. Rep. Mark Takano, a gay Democrat from Riverside, California, has a message for LGBTQ+ people who are despairing under the Trump administration: Keep on fighting.
“This is a moment of real challenge for LGBTQI+ Americans,” Takano said. But based on his experience, he added, “My advice to all LGBTQI+ people is to press on in this moment of adversity and stay true to your values.”
Takano – the first out LGBTQ+ person of color elected to Congress and chair of the Congressional Equality Caucus – recalled in a Friday email interview with LGBTQ+ Freedom Fighters how he was outed in his campaign for Congress in 1994.
It was a fraught time. Newt Gingrich’s “Republican Revolution” was sweeping the country, including reliably Democratic California. Two years earlier, Takano, a trustee of the Riverside Community College District who taught high school history and English, lost to Republican real estate investor Ken Calvert by just over 500 votes. But reports of Calvert owing back taxes and a scandal with a prostitute gave Democrats reason to believe that 33-year- old Takano had a good shot at defeating the lackluster freshman in the conservative 43rd Congressional District.
Then the onslaught began. Newly elected rich Republican State Sen. Robb Hurtt – who funded rabidly anti-gay Traditional Values Coalition leader Rev. Lou Sheldon and co-founded the anti-gay Capitol Resource Institute with fellow Religious Right multimillionaire Howard Ahmanson – contributed heavily to the rough and tumble “Republican Revolution” in California to push back on the Democratic energy generated by Bill Clinton’s presidential victory in 1992.
Former California Republican Party political director Allan Hoffenblum told the Los Angeles Times just before the 1994 midterm elections that he suspected Calvert ally California Assemblymember Ray Haynes outed Takano during a closed-door Republican strategy session to shift negative attention from Calvert and onto Takano.
Haynes told fellow Republicans that Takano was a “liberal homosexual” Democrat. “Everyone knows he’s a homosexual,” Haynes told The Times. “It’s no major-league secret.”
Calvert said he was “surprised” to see the comments later published in the media. However, his campaign sent out a flyer on pink paper that didn’t specifically call Takano “a homosexual” but noted his support for gay rights and said he might make a better representative for San Francisco than Riverside.
Takano said his sexual orientation was irrelevant to voters – but he lost to Calvert and the Gingrich/Hurtt conservative Republican agenda that ran the California Legislature until 1998.

Fast forward to 2012. Takano ran for Congress again – this time as an openly gay man in a year that saw America’s first Black President, Barack Obama, announce support for marriage equality and still win reelection. Takano beat Republican John Tavaglione in the newly created 41st Congressional District. He had support from other out politicians, including Colorado Rep. Jared Polis and Massachusetts Rep. Barney Frank, as well as LGBTQ+ groups such as the Human Rights Campaign and Victory Fund.

Of Japanese heritage, Takano was the first out gay person of color and the first Asian American elected to Congress. Takano has been reelected easily ever since. The Cook Political Report favors Takano over Steve Manos (a Republican) in the June 2 Primary in the 39th Congressional District.
But nothing has been easy during Donald Trump’s second term as president. Takano has introduced numerous pro-LGBTQ+ and otherwise progressive bills, but they’ve gone nowhere in the Republican-majority Congress.
One, for instance, would establish a Commission on Equity and Reconciliation in the Uniformed Services to examine the effects of anti-LGBTQ+ policies on members of the military and recommend ways to compensate them for the harm done. As ranking member—the top Democrat—on the House Committee on Veterans’ Affairs, he has decried the Trump administration’s treatment of out service members.
“I have and will continue to use my position on the Veterans’ Affairs Committee to fight for the rights of LGBTQI+ veterans, including those pushed out of the service by Trump’s trans military ban and those who have lost access to medically necessary VA health care under Secretary [Doug] Collins,” Takano tells us. “I was proud to co-lead the introduction of the Veterans Healthcare Equality Act to ensure the VA does not discriminate on the basis of gender identity when providing health care to our veterans.”

Takano is also a member of the House Committee on Education and Workforce, and he noted the Trump administration has been no friend to the Department of Education, which has seen huge staffing cuts, especially for civil rights enforcement.
“I’m working very closely with my colleagues [on the committee] to conduct congressional oversight and demand accountability from Secretary [Linda] McMahon and Trump administration officials who are so hell-bent on undermining the rights of all students, including LGBTQI+—and particularly transgender—students. Under Trump, there have been massive layoffs at the Office for Civil Rights, and OCR has stopped addressing sexual harassment and sexual violence,” he says.
“This administration’s obsession with attacking transgender rights has led them to abandon the Department of Education’s mission of protecting students from harm—that’s unacceptable,” he says. “That’s why I challenged Secretary McMahon directly about her dismantling and weaponization of OCR at a recent oversight hearing.”
Takano did indeed grill McMahon, who implied that she disagreed with the cuts. “They were firing half the staff that you need at OCR, and it took you 10 months to figure out that was a mistake,” he said in the hearing.
Takano has also introduced the long-pending Equality Act, comprehensive legislation to ban anti-LGBTQ+ discrimination nationwide in employment, housing, and more. He said he looks forward to reintroducing the Equality Act in the next session of Congress, when he’s confident Democrats will hold power after this year’s midterm elections.
In addition, he said he’ll work for Supreme Court reform and to restore voting rights protections. “Like millions of Americans, I was outraged by the Supreme Court’s recent decision to gut the Voting Rights Act,” he said. The Equality Caucus has also announced it is exploring ways to fight anti-LGBTQ+ conversion therapy after the high court struck down Colorado’s law against subjecting minors to the practice.
There may be a new crop of feisty LGBTQ+ legislators shaking things up among the old guard in the next session. The LGBTQ+ Victory Fund has endorsed 220 candidates at all levels of government so far this year, including 18 for U.S. House and Senate, although four have already been knocked out in primaries. It will undoubtedly endorse more.

Among the Victory Fund endorsees for U.S. House are two California Democrats who’ll be in Tuesday’s “jungle primary”: Scott Wiener in the San Francisco district long represented by Nancy Pelosi and Marni von Wilpert in a Palm Springs-area district near Takano’s district. He has endorsed her.
Also in the California primary—in which the top two vote recipients advance to the general election, regardless of party—Takano has endorsed Xavier Becerra for governor. Becerra has been a California state legislator, attorney general, and congressman, and he was U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services under President Joe Biden.

In announcing the endorsement in April, Takano praised Becerra’s “leadership abilities in challenging situations” and his “distinguished career in public service.” Becerra, a Democrat, is leading in one of the most recent polls, with Republican Steve Hilton (a former Fox News commentator) and Democrat Tom Steyer (a former hedge fund manager, now an environmental activist) vying for second place.
Republicans are already employing anti-LGBTQ+ rhetoric, especially anti-transgender rhetoric, against out candidates and allies, including Democratic U.S. Senate candidate James Talarico of Texas, a straight cisgender man. But Takano doesn’t think this is a winning strategy.
“We saw in election after election in 2025-2026 that Democratic candidates won by not letting anti-trans fearmongering define their races,” Takano told LGBTQ+ Freedom Fighters. In the midterms, he added, “It is my firm belief that Americans will make their voices known loud and clear that they overwhelmingly reject Trump’s disastrous policies.”

Written by Trudy King. Karen Ocamb contributed to this story. This is a cross-post from Karen’s LGBTQ+ Freedom Fighters Substack.
Ghana
Ghanaian lawmakers approve anti-LGBTQ+ bill
Measure that would criminalize allyship awaits president’s signature
Ghanaian lawmakers on Friday approved a bill that would, among other things, criminalize LGBTQ+ allyship.
Reuters reported MPs approved the Human Sexual Rights and Family Values Bill, 2025, in a voice vote after parliament’s Constitutional and Legal Affairs Committee backed it.
MPs in 2024 approved a similar bill, but it faced legal challenges and then-President Nana Akufo-Addo didn’t sign it. Lawmakers last year reintroduced the measure after President John Dramani Mahama took office.
The bill awaits his signature.
Rightify Ghana, a Ghanaian LGBTQ+ advocacy group, in a series of social media posts notes MPs passed the bill days before the 4th African Inter-Parliamentary Conference on Family Values and Sovereignty will take place in Accra, the country’s capital.
Russia
Nine Russian LGBTQ+ groups deemed ‘extremist’ banned
Human Rights Watch: authorities ‘intensifying their criminalization’ of queer people
Nine LGBTQ+ groups in Russia have been banned so far this year after authorities deemed them as “extremist.”
Human Rights Watch on Thursday noted courts in seven regions between March and May banned Coming Out, the LGBT Resource Center, Parni Plus, the Moscow Community Center for LGBT+ Initiatives, Irida, the Russian LGBT Network, the Kallisto movement, T9 NSK, and Center T. Human Rights Watch also pointed out a lawsuit has been filed against the Alliance of Straights and LGBT for Equality.
Parni Plus is an LGBTQ+ media outlet.
“Russian authorities are intensifying their criminalization of those who provide critical support to the very LGBT people they have systematically persecuted,” said Human Rights Watch Europe and Central Asia Director Hugh Williamson in a press release. “Authorities should vacate all court decisions and criminal convictions based on these spurious ‘extremism’ charges.”
The Kremlin over the last decade has faced global criticism over its crackdown on LGBTQ+ rights.
The Russian Supreme Court in 2023 ruled the “international LGBT movement” is an extremist organization and banned it.
The country in January designated ILGA World, a global LGBTQ+ and intersex rights group, as an “undesirable” organization. ILGA World in response to the designation noted Russians who are found guilty of engaging with “undesirable” groups face up to six years in prison.
California Politics
Los Angeles LGBTQ+ organizers condemn ‘harmful anti-LGBTQ+ tropes’ in ads targeting John Erickson’s Senate race
Leaders worry about the impact of the ads on the LGBTQ+ community at large
Multiple organizations — including Equality California, the nation’s largest statewide LGBTQ+ civil rights organization — condemned a recent string of political ads targeting West Hollywood councilmember John Erickson.
The political ad was mailed out to voters, with AI-generated photos of Erickson. One ad portrays a photo of Erickson, depicted leisurely in Paris with the phrase “John Erickson: Where public service meets room service.”

On the flyer, claims were made saying that Erickson “used taxpayer dollars to fund a trip to Paris,” implying he was there on vacation and or mismanaging funds.
In a joint statement with the Los Angeles County LGBTQ+ Elected Officials, the LGBTQ+ Victory Fund, and the nonpartisan political organization HONOR PAC, Equality California said these ads “have raised serious concerns within the LGBTQ+ community for relying on imagery and stereotypes that evoke harmful anti-LGBTQ+ tropes.”
“Whether intentional or inadvertent, these tactics cause real harm and contribute to a broader climate in which LGBTQ+ people are increasingly being targeted and attacked across the country for who they are,” the statement continued.
Senate District 24, which Erickson is running for, is “among the most LGBTQ+ voters in California,” according to the statement.
“These tactics feel especially harmful and out of touch with a deeply inclusive district,” a portion of the statement said. “We demand that all candidates and committees in this and other races throughout California carefully review these materials and take meaningful steps to ensure future communications reflect the values of dignity, inclusion, and respect.”
The flyer was paid for by Keep California Golden, a coalition of “industry associations, labor unions, and businesses,” according to its website.
Beyond a paragraph as a description and a list of top donors being the California Association of Realtors, California Correctional Peace Officers Association, and California Building Industry Association, the website for Keep California Golden is blank.
On both the physical ads and website, a note says that the ads were “not authorized by a candidate or a committee controlled by a candidate.”

Additional AI political ad / Distributed by Keep California Golden
Keep California Golden has been around since 2017, but didn’t start receiving significant contributions until quarter 2 of 2018, according to Transparency USA, which tracks data on money in state politics.
Its second and third highest expenditures are to the U.S. Postal Service and Red Printing and Mail, at $411,431 and $218,600, respectively, according to Transparency USA.
Erickson’s trips referenced in the flyer were approved by the city council in a public council meeting, were unanimously approved, and went through proper channels, he told the Los Angeles Blade.
Erickson was elected to the West Hollywood City Council in 2020 and was reelected in 2024. This is his first run for the California Senate, where he’s running for the District 24 seat.
“They’re distorting the facts to make it seem like I’m one person, but in reality, they’re doing it because they’re afraid of what I actually am going to offer,” Erickson said.
His trips were official business, he said, one of which was a trip to meet the late Pope Francis as a West Hollywood representative, for a program that Los Angeles County and the city co-sponsored to foster youth civic engagement through sports.
The ads referenced another approved trip to the most recent Paris Olympics. West Hollywood is hosting Pride House, a housing village for LGBTQ+ Olympians during the upcoming 2028 Olympics.
“We have people here in California that are not only trying to further harm the LGBTQ+ community, but then spending millions of dollars to push it out to voters to mislead them,” Erickson added. “Even here in West Hollywood, we still face homophobia.”
He called the ads “disgusting and reprehensible,” but said he was honored that the community is standing behind him and pushing back.
“Billionaires are spending money against a candidate whom they are deeply afraid of,” Erickson said. “I’m out there calling to tax the billionaires and the corporations to pay their fair share to fund education, health care, social services… and they’re afraid of me, because I’m also supported and endorsed by the California Federation of Labor.”
He feels the ads are aiming to weaken him as a candidate due to his strong labor ties, as a former labor union president, and endorsements by multiple labor unions.
This is also part of a trend of attacking LGBTQ+ rights and existence, he said.
“This is how we’re engaging in politics at a time where LGBTQ+ people are so attacked in every way, shape, and form,” Erickson said. “In states like Kansas and other places, transgender individuals aren’t even able to get a driver’s license. Internationally, Senegal just increased the penalties for LGBTQ+ people to 10 years in prison.”
Whatever the reason, Erickson worries for future openly LGBTQ+ political leaders aiming to make a larger change in higher offices.
“More people need to be aware of how this impacts other LGBTQ+ elected officials or who might want to consider running for office,” Erickson said. “Those are the things that I’m most concerned about, because an attack on me as an out LGBTQ+ elected official is an attack on everyone.”
“Why would someone else want to put themselves up for the scrutiny of running, if all they’re going to do is get lied and distorted about? I think it does more harm to LGBTQ people than we actually know,” he added.
China
China’s top court acknowledges anti-LGBTQ+ discrimination
Postgraduate student petitioned for legal clarification
China’s Supreme People’s Court on May 8 issued a rare response to a petition involving LGBTQ+ discrimination.
In a surprising response; it discussed sexual orientation, gender identity, and gender expression. The response also mentioned workplace discrimination, public humiliation, and school bullying, language considered uncommon from China’s legal system.
The response stemmed from a proposal submitted by a postgraduate student in Qingdao through China’s xinfang petition system on March 25, urging the court to establish clearer judicial standards against discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity. Six weeks later, the Supreme People’s Court Research Office issued a written reply.
The Research Office is an internal legal and policy body within the Supreme People’s Court. It studies legal issues, drafts judicial guidance, and responds to legal inquiries submitted through official channels. Its responses do not carry the same legal weight as a judicial interpretation or court ruling.
“The opinions and suggestions you raised are of great value,” reads a translated version of the Supreme People’s Court Research Office response. “In order to thoroughly implement the Constitution, Civil Code, Employment Promotion Law and other legal provisions, and effectively protect citizens’ personality rights from infringement, the Supreme People’s Court has guided local courts at all levels to handle a number of related cases, and through typical cases and other forms has clarified adjudication rules.”
The response stated that courts may determine public insults, defamation and, discriminatory conduct targeting sexual orientation, gender identity and gender expression as infringement of personality rights. It also said employers treating individuals differently in hiring, employment, transfer or dismissal based on those characteristics could face employment discrimination claims. Schools could also bear legal responsibility for improper discipline or bullying involving students based on sexual orientation, gender identity and gender expression, according to the response.
“It’s not a systematic change from the authorities recognizing LGBTQ rights,” said Renn Hao, an LGBTQ+ activist in China. “However, it’s an informal statement from the Supreme Court. According to a scholar researching LGBTQ legal cases in China, courts are recognizing more cases involving LGBTQ discrimination and same-sex partners through their verdicts.”
China decriminalized consensual same-sex sexual relations in 1997 and removed homosexuality from the country’s list of mental disorders four years later. Chinese law, however, does not recognize same-sex relationships.
Public advocacy involving LGBTQ+ issues also remains tightly controlled. Authorities in recent years have continued restricting community organizing, public events, and online expression involving sexual minorities.
Discussions involving LGBTQ+ issues are also frequently censored on Chinese social media platforms.
Activists and advocacy groups say Chinese authorities in recent years have removed online content, shut down LGBTQ+ student group accounts and restricted public discussion involving sexual minority issues. After the Supreme People’s Court response began circulating online, related posts and articles were also removed from some Chinese platforms.
“It may still be too early to fully assess the long-term impact, as this development has only just happened and the situation is still unfolding,” said Xiaogang Wei, a Beijing-based LGBTQ+ rights activist, filmmaker, and founder of the China Rainbow Collective Foundation. “Although the reply is not legally binding, it represents a rare form of institutional acknowledgment of SOGIE-related discrimination in China. For Chinese LGBTQ people and advocates, this could become a meaningful reference point for future legal advocacy, public communication, and community awareness.”
Wei said the rapid removal of related posts and articles limited the development’s broader public impact and underscored how fragile LGBTQ+ visibility remains in China.
“This is why we believe it is important to continue sharing verified information and ensuring that this development is not erased from public understanding,” Wei said.
Chinese courts in recent years have also heard a number of LGBTQ+-related employment discrimination cases, despite the absence of explicit nationwide protections based on sexual orientation or gender identity. In one notable case, the Supreme People’s Court in 2018 formally recognized “equal employment rights disputes” as a legal cause of action, allowing some discrimination-related cases to proceed through the courts.
Chinese courts have previously handled several LGBTQ+-related disputes involving employment discrimination, custody, and so-called conversion therapy. In 2024, a Beijing court drew attention after recognizing visitation rights for a child involving a same sex couple, a decision activists described as a milestone for LGBTQ+ families in China.
Kenya
Kenyan High Court issues landmark transgender rights ruling
Government ordered to allow trans people to amend ID documents
Kenya’s High Court has ruled the country’s government cannot refuse requests to amend gender markers on birth certificates and other ID documents.
Audrey Mbugua, a prominent transgender activist, and two other people in 2020 sued Attorney General Dorcas Oduor, the Registrar of Births and Deaths, the National Registration Bureau, and Immigration Services Director General Evelyn Cheluget after they did not receive amended birth certificates.
The Washington Blade previously reported the three plaintiffs argued documents that do not correspond with their gender identity “has denied them opportunities and rights.” Oduor, for her part, in response to the plaintiffs’ claims argued “a person’s gender is based on fact — not feelings — and the plaintiffs at birth were registered and named based on their gender status.”
High Court Justice Bahati Mwamuye ruled on May 20.
“The silence and delay cannot defeat rights,” ruled the court, according to the Daily Nation, a Kenyan newspaper. “Constitutional rights cannot be delayed over administrative convenience.”
The court in 2014 ordered the Kenya National Examinations Council to change Mbugua’s name on her academic diplomas and to remove the male gender marker from them.
Kenya’s intersex rights law took effect in 2022. The government in February 2025 announced intersex people can receive birth certificates with an “I” gender marker.
The Daily Nation notes Mwamuye ordered the Registrar of Deaths and Births and other government agencies to “begin receiving and considering applications for gender-marker changes within” 60 days.
“Access to legal identity documentation is not just a human rights issue; it is a foundational pillar of socio-economic inclusion,” said the Initiative for Equality and Non-Discrimination, a Kenyan advocacy group, in response to the ruling. Without accurate IDs or passports, individuals face severe barriers to employment, financial systems, global business travel, and participation in governance and democratic processes.”
“This ruling marks a critical step forward in reducing administrative discrimination and fostering an inclusive environment where every Kenyan citizen’s legal identity aligns with their dignity,” added INEND.
Outright International, a New York-based global LGBTQ+ and intersex advocacy group, in a statement described Mwamuye’s ruling as “a meaningful shift towards aligning Kenya’s legal framework with constitutional guarantees of equality, privacy, and human dignity. Outright International also applauded Mbugua and other activists who fought for this change.
“Today, we celebrate a milestone — one achieved through resilience, solidarity, and an unwavering belief in justice,” said the group. “Outright International stands with transgender and intersex Kenyans in honoring this victory and reaffirming our commitment to advancing rights, recognition, and equality for all.”
-
Beauty4 days agoHey Sweet Cheeks!
-
Ghana4 days agoGhanaian lawmakers approve anti-LGBTQ+ bill
-
Bars & Parties3 days agoMeet your local bartender: Hunter Cassidy
-
Pride Special4 days agoBeyond celebration: Pride as a commitment to care, equity, and inclusion
-
a&e features2 days agoWhy Michelle Visage needs you to get ‘PrEP Wise’
-
Movies4 days ago‘The Stranger’ queers an existentialist classic
-
Books2 days agoBooks for a pre-Pride celebration
-
Russia4 days agoNine Russian LGBTQ+ groups deemed ‘extremist’ banned
-
a&e features2 days agoHow Saunder Choi crafts a queer anthem
-
Film1 day ago‘AIDS DIVA’ screening honors Connie Norman’s legacy
