Connect with us

News

Pete Buttigieg makes pitch to LGBT voters in bid to become first out gay president

2020 hopeful backs Equality Act, health care for transgender people

Published

on

Pete Buttigieg is hoping to become the first openly gay person to win the Democratic presidential nomination. (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

It’s pronounced “Boot-a-judge.”

That was the first thing South Bend, Ind. Mayor Pete Buttigieg cleared up for the Washington Blade in response to questions about his 2020 presidential run in a Jan. 31 interview.

Buttigieg, a Rhodes scholar and Afghanistan veteran, beefed up his national profile in his 2017 run to become Democratic National Committee chair.

The 2020 White House hopeful announced his exploratory committee last month. If successful, the long shot Buttigieg would be the first openly gay person to win the Democratic presidential nomination and the White House.

LGBT priorities for Buttigieg, who said he’d run a campaign based on the themes of freedom, democracy and security, include passage of the Equality Act and greater visibility for transgender people.

Distinguishing himself from other 2020 hopefuls, Buttigieg said he supports transgender people having access to transition-related care, even when they’re in prison. Other candidates, including Kamala Harris and Elizabeth Warren, have different records on that issue.

The full Q&A between the Blade and Buttigieg follows:

Washington Blade: You’re running in a field of Democratic candidates, many of whom have been longtime LGBT allies. What do you bring to the table that’s different?

Pete Buttigieg: First of all, I’m very mindful of the possibility of being the first out nominee in American history, and you know, I think it’s safe to say for many reasons, I’m not like the others.

I also just have a different outlook: I am from the industrial Midwest, I’m in local government and I come from a generation that I think really needs to be stepping forward right now. I think our generation has so much at stake in the future and the decisions that are being made today, and I think it really shows the people in charge, like the current president and administration, don’t care very much about the future because they don’t plan to be here.

2054 is the year when I will reach the current age of the current president, and I think you just take some of these decisions about climate, about the economy much more seriously if you’re hoping to be here in 2054.

What we have here right now is a sequence of decisions that have been made that are very short term, very destructive and it’s time for voices from a generation that has a personal stake in that future to step forward and talk about how we can make that future different.

Blade: But what makes you think you can win the White House if you get the nomination?

Buttigieg: I think the message needs to revolve around three themes: freedom, democracy and security. I think that you have a very strong, progressive foundation for those issues, but I also think we’ve not done a very good job of communicating them across the aisle.

Freedom is something that I think has been monopolized by conservatives in terms of political rhetoric, but when I think about everything from the freedom to marry to the freedom to start a new business knowing you can still get health care, it’s really progressive and Democrats have delivered the kinds of freedom that are most important for our daily lived experience.

When it comes to democracy, I think we’ve demonstrated that we are the party that is more interested in making sure that more people can vote, and I think this needs to be part of a national conversation as well. We need to shore up our democracy through a number of reforms, including D.C. statehood, that just make our democratic republic a little more democratic.

And then on security, we’ve got to understand 21st century security means a lot more than just border security and traditional military issues. I was in the military. I certainly spent a lot of time thinking about traditional military issues, but we have to be talking about cybersecurity, election security, climate security, digital security. And I think people are ready for a message that’s just different from what we’ve had before.

We have a profoundly, almost historically, unpopular president, but that doesn’t mean he gets defeated on his own if we don’t have a compelling message that’s different and better.

Blade: Let’s bring this closer to our LGBT readers. How does support for the LGBT community figure into your run for the presidency?

Buttigieg: I think that it will be vital. I think it will be a spruce of lifeblood because we are perhaps the only minority in more or less equal proportion across every racial, ethnic, economic and geographic group in the country, so one thing that will be very important for the success of this project, especially early on when people take your measure based on fundraising is to be able to demonstrate grassroots support from people in the community who believe that representation at the highest levels, actually having someone from the LGBTQ community on the ballot is important, that it will make things better for the next person who comes along and that America needs to be given a chance to demonstrate that it’s ready for this.

Blade: In terms of LGBT rights issues, where do you want to go with that?

Buttigieg: I think one of the big things that we’re looking at, of course, is the Equality Act. I live in a state where it is still — not in South Bend because we took local action, but in most parts of my state it’s still perfectly illegal to be fired for who you are, and I think we need better legislation, civil rights legislation that takes care of that.

Obviously, we have a lot of issues with hate crimes now in Indiana. At the state level, we’ve been pursuing hate crimes legislation. We have federal hate crimes legislation, but we have to do a lot more, including, not just at the policy level, but at the cultural level. There’s several reasons why hate crimes have gone up by most measures in recent years, and I think, a lot of that starts at the top. It has to do with leadership, it has to do with the tone that it set by those in charge and it has to change.

Blade: What concerns you most about how President Trump is handling LGBT issues?

Buttigieg: Obviously the attack on trans rights and the trans military ban is extremely disturbing. When I was in the military, the people I served with could not have cared less whether I was going home to a girlfriend or boyfriend. They just wanted to know that I was going to be someone they could trust with their lives and vice-versa.

Trans members of the military who are willing to put their lives on the line in order to defend this country deserve to be supported by their commander in chief, and it’s extremely disturbing, especially for someone who, let’s face it, kind of pink-washed his campaign early on and portrayed himself as somebody who might change the way the Republican Party related to the LGBT community to turn around and do this demonstrates that he was never serious about that, not to mention the elevation of Mike Pence to one heartbeat away from the presidency.

Blade: What kind of place will transgender people have in your campaign and your presidency?

Buttigieg: A very prominent place. I’ve been really heartened to see more people, especially in my generation, stepping forward. I think Danica Roem opened a lot of doors in terms of elected leadership, and I think we will be looking to make sure that our campaign as well as a future administration reflects the diversity of this country. Obviously, that includes making sure there are visible roles for trans people.

Blade: One question I want to pose to you because it has been a point of differentiation among the Democratic candidates: Should transgender people, even if they’re in prison, have access to gender reassignment surgery?

Buttigieg: Yeah. I believe that’s part of health care. We provide health care to people who are serving the country, we provide health care to people who are incarcerated. I think the bigger issue is that too many people are incarcerated, but if you are, we need to treat everybody the same, and if you regard this, as I do, as part of health care.

Look, people try to turn others against this around the issue of cost, but the spectacular costs of incarceration have very little to do with things like gender reassignment.

Blade: Are you aware Kamala Harris as California attorney general defended the California Department of Corrections in seeking to deny surgery to transgender inmates and what do you make of that?

Buttigieg: I was not aware of that. I do know that California, if I understand correctly, is one of the few places that has been able to provide that, and I think that the rationale for it is based on it being — not only that it can be medically necessary for many inmates, but also there are shockingly high rates of sexual assaults or sexual abuse for transgender people who are incarcerated, so I think that moving in that direction was the right thing to do and I hope that more states take a look at that, especially the ones that want to ensure that we’re preventing sexual abuse.

Blade: What kind of endorsements has your potential candidacy obtained so far and how do you expect them to grow?

Buttigieg: Obviously, this is a very early phase. We just announced the exploratory committee last Wednesday, but we are going to seek endorsements from organizations and individuals. We’ve already reached out to the Victory Fund, to the Human Rights Campaign and to a lot of the people I respect and talked about.

Rightly, they are taking their time and they’re being very deliberate about this, but I do hope that we will earn that and demonstrate somebody like me belongs in this conversation at the highest level. Hopefully, we will continue to mobilize the support we need in order to be taken seriously.

This first quarter is critical because this is where we establish that we belong at the table, then it becomes a matter, once we’ve shown enough early organizational support at the end of the quarter, then we no longer have to answer questions about whether we belong in the conversation and start really focusing on making sure that what we have to say in the conversation justifies more and more support.

Blade: What will it take for you to move from an exploratory committee to a candidacy in the legal sense?

Buttigieg: I want us to be in a position to have a very strong launch coming out of the gate both in terms of the sort of event we are launching and in terms of the organizational support we have on Day One of that phase, that we’re right where we want to be.

Blade: I’ve had experts tell me you face challenges because you don’t have the name recognition of other candidates and you should run for governor and not president. What would you say to that?

This is not about steps for me…I believe in running for an office when you believe what you offer matches the needs of the moment and I am surprised as anybody that things have come this far, but I think we’ve gotten to a moment where what that office most needs is someone entirely new, something very different, something that is not rooted in the way Washington works today and has more generational energy and on the ground local experience than anybody else…

I just don’t believe that you run for office because you would love to have it or because you think it’s the right step along the way because these offices are too important. You run for office because you think what you have meets the moment, and every time I’ve decided to run for office and every time I’ve decided not to run for an office has been the outcome of that same process of discernment.

Blade: Has anyone told you a gay person cannot be elected president in the year 2020?

Buttigieg: Yes. Some believe that’s the case, and I think there is only one way to demonstrate conclusively that that’s not true.

Blade: If there are LGBT people or people anywhere who want to support you, what is the biggest way to help out?

Buttigieg: So, peteforamerica.com is the place where you can add your name to the list, if you want to be on the list so we know you’re a supporter, if you want to make a financial contribution, which again, right now, in terms of showing we belong at the table, part of how they take your measure is that grassroots financial support.

Over time, especially in early states, we will need help on the ground getting known, making introductions, winning people over and then hopefully as that grows, more and more of a field organization that will have all kinds of roles for people, but you can start by going to peteforamerica.com and adding your name so we know who’s out there to support us.

Editor’s note: This interview has been edited for length.

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

Hungary

Charges against Budapest mayor for organizing Pride march dropped

Country’s new government took office last month

Published

on

The Hungarian parliament in Budapest, Hungary, on April 4, 2024. Authorities have dropped charges against Budapest Mayor Gergely Karácsony over his role in organizing the city's 2025 Pride march. (Washington Blade photo by Michael K. Lavers)

Hungarian authorities on Thursday dropped charges against Budapest Mayor Gergely Karácsony over his role in organizing the city’s 2025 Pride march.

Karácsony spoke at the event, even though then-Prime Minister Viktor Orbán’s government banned it.

More than 100,000 people defied the ban and participated in the march that took place on June 28, 2025. The Associated Press notes the Budapest Chief Prosecutor’s Office in January charged Karácsony with “organizing the unlawful assembly despite a prohibition order.”

Karácsony, who has been Budapest’s mayor since 2019, described himself as a “proud defendant” after his indictment.

“It seems that in this country, this is the price you pay if you stand up for your own freedom and the freedom of others,” he said in a statement, according to the AP. “If anyone thinks they can ban me, deter me, or prevent me and my city from doing so, they are gravely mistaken.”

Budapest is Hungary’s capital and largest city.

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.

Hungarian police on May 29 announced they will allow the Budapest Pride march to take place this year.

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 BBC notes Hungarian authorities cited the decision in their decision to drop the charges against Karácsony.

Authorities in Pécs, a city near Hungary’s border with Croatia, have also dropped charges against Géza Buzás-Hábel, who organized a 2025 Pride event.

Continue Reading

Congress

Ogles faces bipartisan backlash over anti-gay social media post

Tenn. congressman blamed the comment on staffer

Published

on

U.S. Rep. Andy Ogles (R-Tenn.) (Photo public domain)

U.S. Rep. Andy Ogles (R-Tenn.), who represents Tennessee’s 5th Congressional District, is facing backlash from LGBTQ+ advocates and fellow Republicans after a social media post declared that “homosexuality has no place in America.”

“Homosexuality has no place in America. Happy Nuclear Family Month,” the congressman wrote in a post on X that was later deleted.

According to the Williams Institute at UCLA School of Law, an estimated 6.3 percent of U.S. adults identify as LGBTQ+.

Following widespread criticism, Ogles removed the post and blamed it on a staff member.

“The post was stupid, hurtful and a complete distraction from my America First focus. The employee has been reprimanded,” Ogles said in a statement.

The Los Angeles Blade reached out to Ogles’s office for comment but did not receive a response by press time.

Among those condemning the message was U.S. Rep. Mike Lawler (R-N.Y.), who called it “absolutely idiotic” in a social media post.

“Homosexuality exists. In America,” Lawler wrote on X. “In fact, Andy, you have family, friends, neighbors, colleagues, and constituents who are gay and lesbian. It doesn’t make them less than or somehow unworthy of being an American.”

U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) also criticized Ogles’s remarks.

“For all of recorded history, homosexuals have been a part of humanity,” Cruz told TMZ DC. “I think the behavior of consenting adults is their business.”

Chris Sanders, the executive director for the Tennessee Equality Project and Tennessee Equality Project Foundation provided a statement to the Blade about Ogles’s comment.

“The Tennessee Nuclear Family Month resolution has really backfired on conservatives by ensnaring Congressman Ogles in scandal. He used the resolution as a pretext to say that our community doesn’t belong in America, resulting in incredible backlash from across the partisan divide,” Sanders said. “It is a good opportunity for him to pause and reflect on whether it’s time for him to resign. Fighting one’s own constituents is not the purpose of serving in Congress.”

Human Rights Campaign Senior Press Secretary Jarred Keller provided a statement to the Blade regarding Ogles’s comments.

“LGBTQ+ people are woven into the fabric of America, and any politician who questions that is severely out of touch with reality. When so many people are worried about whether they can afford gas to get to work or groceries for their families, the last thing we need is right-wing Republicans targeting marginalized communities with hateful attacks,” Keller said. “Representative Ogles should spend less time attacking LGBTQ+ people and start addressing the issues that actually matter, because last I checked, our community isn’t the reason families are struggling to make ends meet.”

The controversy comes as Tennessee continues to advance legislation affecting LGBTQ+ residents. The state already has several laws on the books that LGBTQ+ advocates have criticized, including the Adult Entertainment Act, enacted in 2023, which restricts certain “adult cabaret performances.”

Lawmakers have also introduced additional measures this legislative session, including the “No Pride Flag or Month Act,” which would prohibit state employees, volunteers, and agents from displaying Pride flags or participating in Pride observances while acting in an official capacity.

Another proposal, the “Banning Bostock Act” would seek to limit the application of state anti-discrimination protections based on the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Bostock v. Clayton County. Tennessee lawmakers have also passed other measures restricting LGBTQ+ rights and access to gender-affirming health care.

Continue Reading

News

Gallup finds LGBTQ+ support among Americans is dropping

Marriage equality support lowest since 2016

Published

on

(Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

Gallup, one of the leading organizations in public opinion polling, has found that LGBTQ+ support among Americans is dropping.

The poll, whose data was collected using Gallup’s annual Values and Beliefs survey, was conducted in May and was published on Wednesday. The data was collected through telephone interviews from a sample of more than 1,000 adults living in all 50 states and D.C. using random digit dialing. 

It highlights declining attitudes surrounding LGBTQ+ issues in multiple areas — from support for same-sex marriage to views on gender identity and the morality of one’s sexuality.

One of the most striking findings was that support for marriage equality fell six points from its 2022-2023 high.

The survey also found that 62 percent of Americans view gay and lesbian relations as morally acceptable, the lowest level since 2016 just after same-sex marriage was legalized nationwide by the U.S. Supreme Court. 

One newer question on the poll found that the perceived morality of changing one’s gender has dropped eight points since 2021, indicating the American public is less supportive of transgender people.

New data from Gallup shows a decline in LGBTQ+ support. (Graph courtesy of Gallup)

The data attributes much of the decline to shifting Republican views alongside the party itself. Conservative leaders have pushed back against diversity, equity, and inclusion programs that were intended to foster greater acceptance of LGBTQ+ people and other historically disadvantaged groups.

President Donald Trump has been a guiding force behind waves of anti-LGBTQ+ sentiment, particularly when it comes to trans rights. The president has enacted multiple executive orders, including Executive Order 14168, “Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government,” which mandates that gender be defined by one’s sex assigned at birth. He also signed Executive Order 14183, “Prioritizing Military Excellence and Readiness,” which barred qualified trans applicants from joining the military and led to the removal of trans service members already serving in the armed forces.

Additionally, he signed Executive Order 14201, “Keeping Men Out of Women’s Sports,” which prohibits trans female athletes from participating on women’s and girls’ sports teams.

In February, Gallup found that an estimated 9 percent of Americans identified as part of the LGBTQ+ community in some form.

The organization also found that 23 percent of adults under age 30 identify as LGBTQ+, compared with 10 percent of those ages 30 to 49 and 3 percent or less among those ages 50 and older.

Continue Reading

Politics

Los Angeles Primary Election Day results are in

Karen Bass and Spencer Pratt to face off; the Governor’s race is still being called

Published

on

Since Donald Trump became President, each election has become very high-stakes. While to the average voter, primary elections may not seem as important, this year is the first year after California Ballot Measure 50 redistricting map opened up more seats for the House of Representatives. This was to combat the redistricting of Texas to get more conservative Congressional areas. 

Sadly, given our political climate, voting along party lines is not enough. California is unique in that the primary allows two candidates to advance to the general election regardless of party. To people sick of the two-party system or the lack of progressive candidates, primaries are an important moment to vote for different options. Additionally, many races, such as judicial races, government positions, and ballot measures, can be decided by this election alone. 

That being said, the Los Angeles County Registrar shows there was only a 22.38% voter turnout for election day. The 77.62% of registered voters does include some mail-in ballots that are yet to be counted, but also shows that a significant amount of voters did not show up for a pretty important race. Votes will be tallied until June 26th, with any votes postmarked on Tuesday affecting these results.  

Two of the most notable races include the vote for California Governor and Los Angeles City Mayor. The race to replace Gavin Newsom is yet to be called, but of the large list of potential nominees, Democrat Xavier Becerra (28.9% of the vote) and Steve Hilton (23.1%) were in the lead and will move on to the general election. Billionaire and progressive Tom Steyer is in the number three position with 22.29% of the vote. Time will tell if he’ll be included in the next election. But Steyer has famously invested millions of his own money in this election and positioned himself as a “class traitor” willing to push progressive reform.  

Former reality personality Spencer Pratt will join incumbent Karen Bass in the mayoral race. Despite his lack of political experience, Pratt’s use of AI attack ads, extensive media coverage, and celebrity endorsements, including West Hollywood Pride Grand Marshall Kathy Hilton, helped him secure 30.44% of the votes, with incumbent Bass receiving 34.78% of the votes. Nithya Raman received 22.32% of the vote. 

County Measure ER, which would add a .5% increase to sales tax over 5 years to cover any potential federal cuts to medical care, failed, receiving only 46.89% of votes. 

On the State level, Nancy Pelosi’s Senate seat is up for grabs. Two Democrats, Scott Wiener and Connie Chan, will move on to the general election. Chan received Pelosi’s endorsement while Equality California highlights Wiener’s commitment to LGBTQIA rights. “For nearly a decade in the California Legislature, Scott Wiener has been one of the nation’s most effective champions for LGBTQ+ people, leading the fight to expand civil rights, protect vulnerable communities, and defend fundamental freedoms. We are proud to congratulate him on his decisive first-place victory in today’s primary election,” said Tony Hoang, Executive Director of Equality California. 

Non-binary candidate and drag queen Maebe Pudlo received 11.32% of the votes in her race for California State Senate, District 26, with Democrats Sara Hernandez (31.44%) and Sarah Rascón (16.14%) set to face off in the general election. Another State Senate race included former West Hollywood Mayor John M. Erickson, who received 16.38% of the vote. Republican G. Rick Marshall (20.46%) and Democrat Brian Goldsmith (18.48%) are poised to take that race to the general.  

To clarify some of the importance of the primary election, Judge Robert Draper was running for re-election to the Superior Court despite facing multiple ethics violations and potential censure. He received 49.09% of the vote while his challenger, Tal K. Valbuena, received 50.91% of the votes. 

For up-to-date details on votes, check out the LA County Registrar/County Clear tallies

Continue Reading

Pentagon

Federal appeals court rules White House illegally banned trans troops

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth says Pentagon will appeal to SCOTUS

Published

on

The Pentagon (Photo by icholakov/Bigstock)

A panel of federal appeals court judges ruled that President Donald Trump’s policy banning transgender troops likely violates their constitutional rights.

The three-judge panel from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled 2-1 that Trump’s Executive Order 14183, also known as “Prioritizing Military Excellence and Readiness,” was created with the intent to exclude people from the military based on their gender identity.

The policy argues that trans people are inherently incapable of meeting the military’s “high standards of readiness, lethality, cohesion, honesty, humility, uniformity, and integrity,” citing a history of or signs of gender dysphoria as the cause. According to the Defense Department, this creates “medical, surgical, and mental health constraints on [an] individual.”

The policy states that, regardless of the physical or intellectual capabilities of each applicant, it views trans military applicants as a monolith, considering them less qualified than their cisgender peers.

Despite the panel’s majority opinion issued on Monday, the first day of Pride Month, the ban remains in effect. The U.S. Supreme Court allowed the Pentagon to enforce the policy last year and will continue to allow it to remain in place as litigation proceeds.

The panel’s new ruling will prevent the military from discharging current service members named in the lawsuit, but it does not allow new transrecruits to join.

The policy “appears to be driven by the bare desire to harm a politically unpopular group: persons who identify as transgender,” Judge Robert Wilkins, a Democratic appointee of President Barack Obama wrote for the majority.

Judge Justin Walker, the author of the dissenting opinion and a Republican Trump appointee, argued that the authority to determine military policy does not rest with the courts. Instead, he wrote, the Constitution grants that power to Congress through legislation and to the president as commander in chief of the armed forces.

“We have neither the expertise nor the authority to decide whether the military can exclude the plaintiffs from its ranks. The Constitution assigns that authority to Congress and the commander-in-chief,” Walker wrote.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth indicated that an appeal is in the works, posting, “See you at SCOTUS” on X on Monday in response to the ruling.

Jennifer Levi, senior director of transgender and queer rights at GLAD Law, which has led the litigation since last November, applauded the decision.

“Today’s decision is a powerful vindication of the plaintiffs’ extraordinary courage and unwavering commitment to their country,” Levi said.

The Los Angeles Blade spoke with Second Lt. Nicolas (Nic) Talbott of the U.S. Army, the lead plaintiff in the case, and Levi from GLAD Law back in November.

While discussing the case and his experiences as a trans service member, Talbott said his identity is an asset rather than a hindrance, particularly when it comes to identifying problems and finding solutions, regardless of what others may think or say.

“Being transgender is not some sad thing that people go through,” Talbott told the Blade. “This is something that has taken years and years and years of dedication and discipline and research and ups and downs to get to the point where I am today … my ability to transition was essential to getting me to that point where I am today.”

He also discussed the impact of removing qualified and dedicated service members from the military, arguing that the consequences will be felt long after Trump leaves office.

“When we’re losing thousands of those qualified, experienced individuals … those are seats that are not just going to be able to be filled by anybody,” he said. “[That’s] military training that’s not going to be able to be replaced for years and years to come.”

“Every person who puts on the uniform is expected to make a tremendous amount of sacrifice,” Talbott said. “Who I am under this uniform should have no bearing on that … We shouldn’t be picking and choosing which veterans are worthy of our thanks on that day.”

Levi characterized the policy as overtly cruel and legally indefensible to the Blade.

“This policy and its rollout is even more cruel than the first in a number of ways,” Levi explained. “For one, the policy itself says that transgender people are dishonest, untrustworthy and undisciplined, which is deeply offensive and degrading and demeaning.”

She also argued that the administration’s cost justification is flawed, saying that removing and replacing trans service members is more expensive than retaining them.

“There’s no legitimate justification relating to cost … it is far more expensive to both purge the military of people who are serving and also to replace people … than to provide the minuscule amount of costs for medications other service members routinely get.”

Continue Reading

National

Results from key Tuesday primary races

Wiener advances in effort to replace Pelosi in House

Published

on

Democratic State Sen. Scott Wiener (Photo courtesy of Scott Wiener)

State officials in California had not called the governor’s race as of Wednesday morning but Republican Steve Hilton and Democrat Xavier Becerra appear likely to advance to the general election. 

The race for governor has been scrambled several times after Kamala Harris opted not to run, Rep. Eric Swalwell dropped out after sexual misconduct allegations surfaced, and Rep. Katie Porter’s campaign fizzled. Becerra would be the state’s first Latino governor since 1875 if elected. Hilton was endorsed by President Trump. 

In the Los Angeles mayor’s race, the AP declared that incumbent Mayor Karen Bass will advance to the Nov. 3 runoff while former reality TV star Spencer Pratt and LA Council member Nithya Raman were competing for second place. California is notoriously slow in counting ballots and only about half of the results were available by Wednesday morning.

In San Francisco, Democratic State Sen. Scott Wiener advanced to the general election in November, besting Supervisor Connie Chan, who was endorsed by House Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi. Pelosi is retiring from Congress after nearly 40 years in the House.

In Iowa, Democratic state Rep. Josh Turek won the primary for an open U.S. Senate seat, defeating state Sen. Zach Wahls. Turek will face Rep. Ashley Hinson, who won the GOP primary with President Donald Trump’s endorsement, in the general election.  

The Iowa seat is open because Sen. Joni Ernst (R) decided not to seek re-election. The primary was closely watched by LGBTQ advocates because Wahls rose to national prominence after a speech he made defending marriage equality went viral in 2011. Wahls was raised by a lesbian couple. 

Continue Reading

Congress

10 HIV/AIDS activists arrested on Capitol Hill

Protesters interrupted Secretary of State Marco Rubio during hearing

Published

on

(Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

U.S. Capitol Police on Tuesday arrested 10 HIV/AIDS activists who protested Secretary of State Marco Rubio during a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing.

The activists from Housing Works, Health GAP, the Treatment Action Group, and ACT UP held signs and chanted “Rubio’s Cuts Kill People with AIDS, PEPFAR Saves Lives!” before officers removed them from Dirksen Senate Office Building room where the hearing took place.

A media advisory the Los Angeles Blade received before the protest noted “mounting evidence of Rubio’s attempts to sabotage PEPFAR (the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, U.S. bilateral AIDS program) and vital global health programs.” The press release specifically highlighted three specific points:

• Eliminating Centers for Disease Control’s (CDC) lifesaving PEPFAR programs, which currently support approximately 12 million people on HIV treatment across 51 countries. Instead, Rubio intends to dismantle CDC’s current PEPFAR role and stamp out their global footprint in disease outbreak and surveillance for pandemics beyond HIV. Experts including eight former CDC Directors under Republican and Democratic administrations have spoken out against this effort to dismantle PEPFAR. Recent PEPFAR data showed sharp decreases in the numbers of people newly tested, diagnosed, and treated for HIV, but these data would have been even worse if not for CDC’s PEPFAR programs.

• Withholding $2 billion in Congressionally appropriated FY25 funding, including $330 million to combat HIV, $250 million to fight malaria, $320 million for maternal and child health programs, and nearly $650 million in global health security programs.

• Negotiating secret bilateral deals blackmailing African governments by demanding access to critical mineral wealth as a condition of access to HIV treatment and prevention funding.

The groups have staged several protests against the Trump-Vance administration’s HIV/AIDS policies since it took office.

Rubio on Jan. 28, 2025, issued a waiver that allowed PEPFAR and other “life-saving humanitarian assistance” programs to continue to operate during a freeze on nearly all U.S. foreign aid spending. HIV/AIDS service providers around the world with whom the Blade has spoken say PEPFAR cuts and the loss of funding from the U.S. Agency for International Development, which officially closed on July 1, 2025, has severely impacted their work.

The State Department last September announced PEPFAR will distribute lenacapavir in countries with high prevalence rates.

The New York Times last summer reported Vought “apportioned” only $2.9 billion of $6 billion that Congress set aside for PEPFAR for fiscal year 2025. (PEPFAR in the coming fiscal year will use funds allocated in fiscal year 2024.)

Bipartisan opposition in the U.S. Senate prompted the Trump-Vance administration last July withdraw a proposal to cut $400 million from PEPFAR’s budget. Vought a few weeks later said he would use a “pocket rescission” to cancel $4.9 billion for HIV/AIDS prevention and global health programs and other foreign aid assistance initiatives that Congress had already approved.

The White House in January expanded the global gag rule to ban U.S. foreign aid for groups that promote “gender ideology.” President Ronald Reagan in 1985 implemented the original regulation, also known as the “Mexico City” policy, which bans U.S. foreign aid for groups that support abortion and/or offer abortion-related services. Advocacy groups insist the expanded rule will adversely impact HIV prevention efforts around the world.

“Congress must stop Secretary Rubio before he dismantles PEPFAR,” said Treatment Action Group’s Kendall Martinez-Wright. “Rubio continues to defy the will of Congress and the American people who want this program restored and repaired. Under his leadership he is diverting funding and trying to eliminate the essential role of technical experts in global HIV and global health, while program performance is flailing.”

Continue Reading

Federal Government

Advocates push back on proposed FCC warning labels

New rating system public notice seeking comments issued on April 22

Published

on

(Photo by REDPIXEL.PL/Bigstock)

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.

Continue Reading

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

Published

on

Equality California Equality Brief

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

Continue Reading

Hungary

Hungarian authorities lift Budapest Pride ban

Country’s new government took office last month

Published

on

Budapest Pride participants march over the Erzsebet Bridge in Budapest, Hungary, on June 28, 2025, despite an official ban. The country's new government will allow this year's Budapest Pride march to take place without restrictions. (Courtesy photo)

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.

Continue Reading

Popular