En El Salvador, la violencia contra la población LGBTQ+ no ha disminuido: ha mutado. Lo que antes se expresaba en crímenes de odio, hoy se manifiesta en discriminación institucional, abandono y silencio estatal. Mientras el discurso oficial evita cualquier referencia a inclusión o diversidad, las cifras muestran un panorama alarmante.

Según el Informe 2025 sobre las vulneraciones de los derechos humanos de las personas LGBTQ en El Salvador, elaborado por el Observatorio de Derechos Humanos LGBTIQ+ de ASPIDH, con el apoyo de Hivos y Arcus Foundation, desde el 1 de enero al 22 de septiembre de 2025 se registraron 301 denuncias de vulneraciones de derechos.

El departamento de San Salvador concentra 155 de esas denuncias, reflejando la magnitud del problema en la capital.

Violencia institucionalizada: el Estado como principal agresor

El informe revela que las formas más recurrentes de violencia son la discriminación (57 por ciento), seguida de intimidaciones y amenazas (13 por ciento), y agresiones físicas (10 por ciento). Pero el dato más inquietante está en quiénes ejercen esa violencia.

Los cuerpos uniformados, encargados de proteger a la población, son los principales perpetradores:

• 31.1 por ciento corresponde a la Policía Nacional Civil (PNC),

• 26.67 por ciento al Cuerpo de Agentes Municipales (CAM),

• 12.22 por ciento a militares desplegados en las calles bajo el régimen de excepción.

A ello se suma un 21.11 por ciento de agresiones cometidas por personal de salud pública, especialmente por enfermeras, lo que demuestra que la discriminación alcanza incluso los espacios que deberían garantizar la vida y la dignidad.

Loidi Guardado, representante de ASPIDH, comparte con el Los Angeles Blade un caso que retrata la cotidianidad de estas violencias:

“Una enfermera en la clínica VICITS de San Miguel, en la primera visita me reconoció que la persona era hijo de un promotor de salud y fue amable. Pero luego de realizarle un hisopado cambió su actitud a algo despectiva y discriminativa. Esto le sucedió a un hombre gay.”

Este tipo de episodios reflejan un deterioro en la atención pública, impulsado por una postura gubernamental que rechaza abiertamente cualquier enfoque de inclusión, y tacha la educación de género como una “ideología” a combatir.

El discurso del Ejecutivo, que se opone a toda iniciativa con perspectiva de diversidad, ha tenido consecuencias directas: el retroceso en derechos humanos, el cierre de espacios de denuncia, y una mayor vulnerabilidad para quienes pertenecen a comunidades diversas.

El miedo, la desconfianza y el exilio silencioso

El estudio también señala que el 53.49 por ciento de las víctimas son mujeres trans, seguidas por hombres gays (26.58 por ciento). Sin embargo, la mayoría de las agresiones no llega a conocimiento de las autoridades.

“En todos los ámbitos de la vida —salud, trabajo, esparcimiento— las personas LGBT nos vemos intimidadas, violentadas por parte de muchas personas. Sin embargo, las amenazas y el miedo a la revictimización nos lleva a que no denunciemos. De los casos registrados en el observatorio, el 95.35 por ciento no denunció ante las autoridades competentes”, explica Guardado.

La organización ASPIDH atribuye esta falta de denuncia a varios factores: miedo a represalias, desconfianza en las autoridades, falta de sensibilidad institucional, barreras económicas y sociales, estigma y discriminación.

Además, la ausencia de acompañamiento agrava la situación, producto del cierre de numerosas organizaciones defensoras por falta de fondos y por las nuevas normativas que las obligan a registrarse como “agentes extranjeros”.

Varias de estas organizaciones —antes vitales para el acompañamiento psicológico, legal y educativo— han migrado hacia Guatemala y Costa Rica ante la imposibilidad de operar en territorio salvadoreño.

Educación negada, derechos anulados

Mónica Linares, directora ejecutiva de ASPIDH, lamenta el deterioro de los programas educativos que antes ofrecían una oportunidad de superación para las personas trans:

“Hubo un programa del ACNUR que lamentablemente, con todo el cierre de fondos que hubo a partir de las declaraciones del presidente Trump y del presidente Bukele, pues muchas de estas instancias cerraron por el retiro de fondos del USAID.”

Ese programa —añade— beneficiaba a personas LGBTQ+ desde la educación primaria hasta el nivel universitario, abriendo puertas que hoy permanecen cerradas.

Actualmente, muchas personas trans apenas logran completar la primaria o el bachillerato, en un sistema educativo donde la discriminación y el acoso escolar siguen siendo frecuentes.

Organizaciones en resistencia

Las pocas organizaciones que aún operan en el país han optado por trabajar en silencio, procurando no llamar la atención del gobierno. “Buscan pasar desapercibidas”, señala Linares, “para evitar conflictos con autoridades que las ven como si no fueran sujetas de derechos”.

Desde el Centro de Intercambio y Solidaridad (CIS), su cofundadora Leslie Schuld coincide. “Hay muchas organizaciones de derechos humanos y periodistas que están en el exilio. Felicito a las organizaciones que mantienen la lucha, la concientización. Porque hay que ver estrategias, porque se está siendo silenciado, nadie puede hablar; hay capturas injustas, no hay derechos.”

Schuld agrega que el CIS continuará apoyando con un programa de becas para personas trans, con el fin de fomentar su educación y autonomía económica. Sin embargo, admite que las oportunidades laborales en el país son escasas, y la exclusión estructural continúa.

Matar sin balas: la anulación de la existencia

“En efecto, no hay datos registrados de asesinatos a mujeres trans o personas LGBTIQ+ en general, pero ahora, con la vulneración de derechos que existe en El Salvador, se está matando a esta población con la anulación de esta.”, reflexiona Linares.

Esa “anulación” a la que se refiere Linares resume el panorama actual: una violencia que no siempre deja cuerpos, pero sí vacíos. La negación institucional, la falta de políticas públicas, y la exclusión social convierten la vida cotidiana en un acto de resistencia para miles de salvadoreños LGBTQ+.

En un país donde el Ejecutivo ha transformado la narrativa de derechos en una supuesta “ideología”, la diversidad se ha convertido en una amenaza política, y los cuerpos diversos, en un campo de batalla. Mientras el gobierno exalta la “seguridad” como su mayor logro, la población LGBTQ+ vive una inseguridad constante, no solo física, sino también emocional y social.

El Salvador, dicen los activistas, no necesita más silencio. Necesita reconocer que la verdadera paz no se impone con fuerza de uniformados, sino con justicia, respeto y dignidad.

President Trump signed EO 14183, titled “Prioritizing Military Excellence and Readiness,” on Jan. 27, directing the Department of Defense (DoD) to adopt policies that would prohibit transgender, nonbinary, and gender-nonconforming people from serving in the military.

The Trump-Vance administration’s policy shift redefines the qualifications for military service, asserting that transgender people are inherently incapable of meeting the military’s “high standards of readiness, lethality, cohesion, honesty, humility, uniformity, and integrity,” citing a history or signs of gender dysphoria. According to the DoD, this creates “medical, surgical, and mental health constraints on [an] individual.” Regardless of their physical or intellectual capabilities, transgender applicants are now considered less qualified than their cisgender peers.

On Jan. 28, 2025, GLBTQ Legal Advocates and Defenders (GLAD) Law and the National Center for LGBTQ Rights (NCLR) filed Talbott v. Trump, a federal lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia challenging the executive order. Originally filed on equal protection grounds on behalf of six active service members and two individuals seeking enlistment, the case has since grown to include 12 additional plaintiffs.

The Blade spoke exclusively with Second Lt. Nicolas (Nic) Talbott, U.S. Army, a plaintiff in the case, and with Jennifer Levi, Senior Director of Transgender and Queer Rights at GLAD Law, who is leading the litigation.

For Talbott, serving in the military has been a lifelong aspiration, one he pursued despite the barriers posed by discriminatory policies.

“Being transgender posed quite the obstacle to me achieving that dream,” Talbott told the Blade. “Not because it [being trans] had any bearing on my ability to become a soldier and meet the requirements of a United States soldier, but simply because of the policy changes that we’ve been facing as transgender service members throughout the course of the past decade… My being transgender had nothing to do with anything that I was doing as a soldier.”

This drive was fueled by early life experiences, including the impact of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, which shaped his desire to protect his country.

“Even for an eight-year-old kid, [9/11] has a tremendous amount of impact… I remember thinking, you know, this is a terrible thing. Me, and when I grow up, I want to make sure nothing like this ever happens again,” he said. “I’ve still tried to gear my life in a way that I can be preparing myself to eventually help accomplish that mission of keeping America safe from anything like that ever happening again.”

The attacks inspired countless Americans to enlist; according to the New York City government, 181,510 joined active duty and 72,908 enlisted in the reserves in the year following 9/11. Although Talbott was too young to serve at the time, the events deeply influenced his educational and career path.

“For me, [9/11] just kind of helped shape my future and set me on the path that I’m currently on today,” he added. “It ignited my passion for the field, and it’s something that you know, I’ve carried with me into my adult life, into my professional life, and that I hope to have a career in the future.”

Talbott holds a master’s degree in criminology with a focus on counterterrorism and global security, and while completing his degree, he gained practical experience working with the Transportation Security Administration.

Despite the public scrutiny surrounding the lawsuit and the ongoing uncertainty of his military future, Talbott remains grounded in the values that define military service.

“Being so public about my involvement with this lawsuit grants me the very unique opportunity to continue to exemplify those values,” Talbott said. “I’m in a very privileged spot where I can speak relatively openly about this experience and what I’m doing. It’s very empowering to be able to stand up, not only for myself, but for the other transgender service members out there who have done nothing but serve with honor and dignity and bravery.”

The ban has created significant uncertainty for transgender service members, who now face the possibility of separation solely because of their gender identity.

“With this ban… we are all [trans military members] on track to be separated from the military. So it’s such a great deal of uncertainty… I’m stuck waiting, not knowing what tomorrow might bring. I could receive a phone call any day stating that the separation process has been initiated.”

While the Department of Defense specifies that most service members will receive an honorable discharge, the policy allows for a lower characterization if a review deems it warranted. Compensation and benefits differ depending on whether service members opt for voluntary or involuntary separation. Voluntary separation comes with full separation pay and no obligation to repay bonuses, while involuntary separation carries lower pay, potential repayment of bonuses, and uncertain success in discharge review processes.

Healthcare coverage through TRICARE continues for 180 days post-discharge, but reduced benefits, including VA eligibility, remain a concern. Those with 18–20 years of service may qualify for early retirement, though even this is not guaranteed under the policy.

Talbott emphasized the personal and professional toll of the ban, reflecting on the fairness and capability of transgender service members.

“Quite frankly, the evidence that we have at hand points in the complete opposite direction… there are no documented cases that I’m aware of of a transgender person having a negative impact on unit cohesion simply by being transgender… Being transgender is just another one of those walks of life.”

“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 … military training that’s not going to be able to be replaced for years and years to come.”

Talbott also highlighted the unique discipline, dedication, and value of diversity that transgender service members bring—especially in identifying problems and finding solutions, regardless of what others think or say. That, he explained, was part of his journey of self-discovery and a key reason he wants to continue serving despite harsh words of disapproval from the men leading the executive branch.

“Being transgender is not some sad thing that people go through… 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 sees that as an asset rather than a liability. By having a more diverse, well-rounded group of people, the military can view challenges from perspectives that would otherwise be overlooked. That ability to look at things in a fresh way, he explained, can transform a good service member into a great one.

“I think the more diverse our military is, the stronger our military is… We need people from all different experiences and all different perspectives, because somebody is going to see that challenge or that problem in a way that I would never even think of… and that is what we need more of in the U.S. military.”

Beyond operational effectiveness, Talbott emphasized the social impact of visibility and leadership within the ranks. Fellow soldiers often approached him for guidance, seeing him as a trusted resource because of his transgender status.

“I can think of several instances in which I have been approached by fellow soldiers… I feel like you are a person I can come to if I have a problem with X, Y or Z… some people take my transgender status and designate me as a safe person, so to speak.”

With the arrival of Veterans Day, the Blade asked what he wishes the public knew about the sacrifices of transgender service members. His answer was modest.

“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.”

Jennifer Levi, GLAD Law’s Senior Director of Transgender and Queer Rights, also spoke with the Blade and outlined the legal and human consequences of the ban. This is not Levi’s first time challenging the executive branch on transgender rights; she led the legal fight against the first Trump administration’s military ban in both Doe v. Trump and Stockman v. Trump.

Levi characterized the policy as overtly cruel and legally indefensible.

“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 highlighted procedural abuses and punitive measures embedded in the policy compared to the 2017 ban.

“In the first round the military allowed transgender people to continue to serve… In this round the military policy purge seeks to purge every transgender person from military service, and it also proposes to do it in a very cruel and brutal way, which is to put people through a process… traditionally reserved for kicking people out of the military who engaged in misconduct.”

Levi cited multiple examples of discrimination, including the revocation of authorized retirements and administrative barriers to hearings.

She also explained that the administration’s cost argument is flawed, as removing and replacing transgender 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.”

On legal grounds, Levi noted the ban violates the Equal Protection Clause.

“The Equal Protection Clause prevents laws that are intended to harm a group of people… The doctrine is rooted in animus, which means a bare desire to harm a group is not even a legitimate governmental justification.”

When asked what she wishes people knew about Talbott and other targeted transgender military members, Levi emphasized their extraordinary service.

“The plaintiffs that I represent are extraordinary… They have 260 years of committed service to this country… I have confidence that ultimately, this baseless ban should not be able to legally survive.”

Other organizations have weighed in on Talbott v. Trump and similar lawsuits targeting transgender service members.

Human Rights Campaign Foundation President Kelley Robinson criticized the ban’s impact on military readiness and highlighted the counterintuitive nature of removing some of the country’s most qualified service members.

“Transgender servicemembers serve their country valiantly, with the same commitment, the same adherence to military standards and the same love of country as any of their counterparts,” Robinson said. “This ban by the Trump administration, which has already stripped transgender servicemembers of their jobs, is cruel, unpatriotic, and compromises the unity and quality of our armed forces.”

Lambda Legal Senior Counsel Sasha Buchert echoed the legal and moral imperative to reverse the policy.

“Every day this discriminatory ban remains in effect, qualified patriots face the threat of being kicked out of the military,” she said. “The evidence is overwhelming that this policy is driven by animus rather than military necessity… We are confident the court will see through this discriminatory ban and restore the injunction that should never have been lifted.”

The U.S. Supreme Court has declined to hear an appeal from Kim Davis, the former Rowan County, Ky., clerk best known for refusing to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples after the landmark 2015 Obergefell v. Hodges decision legalized same-sex marriage nationwide.

Following the Obergefell ruling, Davis stopped issuing marriage licenses altogether and has since filed multiple appeals seeking to challenge same-sex marriage protections. The court once again rejected her efforts on Monday.

In this latest appeal, Davis sought to overturn a $100,000 monetary award she was ordered to pay to David Moore and David Ermold, a same-sex couple to whom she denied a marriage license. Her petition also urged the court to use the case as a vehicle to revisit the constitutional right to same-sex marriage.

The petition, along with the couple’s brief in opposition, was submitted to the Supreme Court on Oct. 22 and considered during the justices’ private conference on Nov. 7. Davis needed at least four votes for the court to take up her case, but Monday’s order shows she fell short.

Cathy Renna, the director of communications for the National LGBTQ Task Force, a non-profit organization that works towards supporting the LGBQ community through grassroots organizing told the Los Angeles Blade:
“Today’s decision is not surprising given the longshot status of Davis’s claim, but it’s a relief that the Supreme Court will not hear it, given the current make up of the court itself. We hope that this settles the matter and marriage equality remains the law of the land for same-sex couples.”

Human Rights Campaign President Kelley Robinson released the following statement:

“Today, love won again. When public officials take an oath to serve their communities, that promise extends to everyone — including LGBTQ+ people. The Supreme Court made clear today that refusing to respect the constitutional rights of others does not come without consequences.

Thanks to the hard work of HRC and so many, marriage equality remains the law of the land through Obergefell v. Hodges and the Respect for Marriage Act. Even so, we must remain vigilant.

It’s no secret that there are many in power right now working to undermine our freedoms — including marriage equality — and attack the dignity of our community any chance they get. Last week, voters rejected the politics of fear, division, and hate, and chose leaders who believe in fairness, freedom, and the future. In race after race, the American people rejected anti-transgender attacks and made history electing pro-equality candidates up and down the ballot.

And from California to Virginia to New Jersey to New York City, LGBTQ+ voters and Equality Voters made the winning difference. We will never relent and will not stop fighting until all of us are free.”

This story is developing and will be updated as more information becomes available.

You may not be too familiar with LA County Assessor Jeffrey Prang. You’ve probably never heard of the office of the LA County Assessor, or you might only have a vague notion of what it does.

But with a career in city politics spanning nearly thirty years, he’s among the longest-serving openly gay elected officials in the United States, and for his work serving the people of Los Angeles and championing the rights of the city’s LGBTQ people, the Stonewall Democratic Club is honoring him at their 50^th Anniversary Celebration and Awards Night Nov 15 at Beaches Tropicana in West Hollywood.

Prang moved to Los Angeles from his native Michigan after college in 1991, specifically seeking an opportunity to serve in politics as an openly gay man. In 1997, he was elected to the West Hollywood City Council, where he served for 18 years, including four stints as mayor.

“I was active in politics, but in Michigan at the time I left, you couldn’t really be out and involved in politics… My life was so compartmentalized. I had my straight friends, my gay friends, my political friends, and I couldn’t really mix and match those things,” he says.

“One of the things that was really impactful was as you drove down Santa Monica Boulevard and saw those rainbow flags placed there by the government in the median island. That really said, this is a place where you can be yourself. You don’t have to be afraid.” 

One thing that’s changed over Prang’s time in office is West Hollywood’s uniqueness as a place of safety for the queer community. 

“It used to be, you could only be out and gay and politically involved if you were from Silver Lake or from West Hollywood. The thought of being able to do that in Downey or Monterey Park or Pomona was foreign. But now we have LGBTQ centers, gay pride celebrations, and LGBT elected officials in all those jurisdictions, something that we wouldn’t have thought possible 40 years ago,” he says.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Assessor Jeff Prang (@lacassessor)

Prang’s jump to county politics is emblematic of that shift. In 2014, amid a scandal that brought down the previous county assessor, Prang threw his name in contention for the job, having worked in the assessor’s office already for the previous two years. He beat out eleven contenders in the election, won reelection in 2018 and 2022, and is seeking a fourth term next year.

To put those victories in perspective, at the time of his first election, Prang represented more people than any other openly gay elected official in the world. 

Beyond his office, Prang has lent his experience with ballot box success to helping get more LGBT people elected through his work with the Stonewall Democrats and with a new organization he co-founded last year called the LA County LGBTQ Elected Officials Association (LACLEO).

LACLEO counts more than fifty members, including officials from all parts of the county, municipal and state legislators, and members of school boards, water boards, and city clerks.  

“I assembled this group to collectively use our elected strength and influence to help impact policy in Sacramento and in Washington, DC, to take advantage of these elected leaders who have a bigger voice in government than the average person, and to train them and educate them to be better advocates on behalf of the issues that are important for us,” Prang says.

“I do believe as a senior high-level official I need to play a role and have an important voice in supporting our community,” he says. 

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Chinese Club San Marino (@chineseclubsm)

Ok, but what is the LA County assessor, anyway? 

“Nobody knows what the assessor is. 99% of people think I’m the guy who collects taxes,” Prang says.

The assessor makes sure that all properties in the county are properly recorded and fairly assessed so that taxes can be levied correctly. It’s a wonky job, but one that has a big impact on how the city raises money for programs.

And that wonkiness suits Prang just fine. While the job may seem unglamorous, he gleefully boasts about his work overhauling the office’s technology to improve customer service and efficiency, which he says is proving to be a role model for other county offices.

“I inherited this 1970s-era mainframe green screen DOS-based legacy system. And believe it or not, that’s the standard technology for most large government agencies. That’s why the DMV sucks. That’s why the tax collection system sucks. But I spent $130 million over almost 10 years to rebuild our system to a digitized cloud-based system,” Prang says.

“I think the fact that my program was so successful did give some impetus to the board funding the tax collector and the auditor-controller to update their system, which is 40 years behind where they need to be.”

More tangible impacts for everyday Angelenos include his outreach to promote tax savings programs for homeowners, seniors, and nonprofits, and a new college training program that gives students a pipeline to good jobs in the county.

As attacks on the queer community intensify from the federal government, Prang says the Stonewall Democrats are an important locus of organization and resistance, and he encourages anyone to get involved.

“It is still an important and relevant organization that provides opportunities for LGBTQ people to get involved, to have an impact on our government and our civic life. If you just wanna come and volunteer and donate your time, it provides that, if you really want to do more and have a bigger voice and move into areas of leadership, it provides an opportunity for that as well,” he says.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Stonewall Democrats (@stonewalldems)

Today marks the 37th day of the current government shutdown, the longest witnessed in the country’s history. As a result, people who receive federal Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits have not received their monthly aid for November. In Los Angeles, over 1.5 million people rely on these funds to purchase groceries. 

On Oct. 28th, Governor Gavin Newsom announced that California joined over 20 other states in suing the administration over its “unlawful refusal” to provide SNAP aid even though it has the funds to do so. Two federal judges ruled in favor of the lawsuit, though when and how much aid will be distributed remains inconclusive.

At a press briefing on Tuesday, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt stated that the administration is “fully complying” with the court order. “The recipients of the SNAP benefits need to understand: it’s going to take some time to receive this money because the Democrats have forced the administration into a very untenable position,” Leavitt continued. “We are digging into a contingency fund that is supposed to be for emergencies, catastrophes, for war.” 

On Wednesday morning, local leaders in Los Angeles held their own press conference at the Weingart East Los Angeles YMCA to denounce the administration’s inaction and to discuss alternative efforts that are trying to fill the gap as SNAP aid remains suspended. “We’re here today because the federal government has turned its back on millions of families, and we refuse to stay silent,” said District 54 Assemblymember Mark González. “This is more than a press conference. This is a plea for sanity, a demand for humanity, and a call to action…California is stepping up to do what Washington will not, and that’s to feed our people.”

Alongside a number of other local leaders and advocates, including Assemblymember Jesse Gabriel, Speaker of the California State Assembly Robert Rivas, Boyle Heights community leader Margarita “Mago” Amador, Congressman Jimmy Gomez, YMCA president Victor Dominguez, and Food Forward founder Rick Nahmias, González announced a partnership with the YMCA’s FeedLA program. $7.5 million has been secured to fund food distribution efforts across the county’s 29 YMCA sites.

Residents do not need to have a YMCA membership to take part. Resources like groceries, warm meals, and home deliveries will be available at various times throughout the week. There are currently no weekend distribution dates listed.

This announcement comes in the midst of other local efforts bolstering on-the-ground SNAP relief. On Tuesday, the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors approved a motion that will strengthen the Office of Food Systems (OFS), a partnership between county leaders and local philanthropic organizations aiming to create equitable food systems for residents. The motion would establish deeper connections between OFS and all County departments, as well as strengthen state and federal food policy coordination. 

The county has also funded a $10 million contract with the Los Angeles Regional Food Bank, which will allow the organization to purchase more produce and create additional pantry and food distribution pop-up sites.

For many, these solutions offer a temporary landing pad as they hold out for their benefits to be reinstated. “Food pantries are not just places where a bag of food is handed out. They are a bridge of hope for our most vulnerable communities,” said Amador, at Wednesday’s press conference. “When a family comes to a pantry, many times they don’t just bring an empty bag. They also bring worries, stress and [the] fear of not being able to feed their children. They leave with a bag of food [and] they take with them a bit of dignity, relief, and a feeling that they are not alone.”

Rep. Nancy Pelosi, the nation’s first and only female speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives and a lifelong LGBTQ+ ally, announced Thursday that she will not seek re-election next year, after 38 years in Congress, many of them as House party leader.

“I have truly loved serving as your voice in Congress, and I have always honored the song of St. Francis, ‘Lord make an instrument of thy peace,’ the anthem of our city. That is why I want you, my fellow San Franciscans, to be the first to know. I will not be seeking reelection to Congress,” Pelosi, 85, announced in a video.

Thank you, San Francisco. pic.twitter.com/OP8ubeFzR6

— Nancy Pelosi (@TeamPelosi) November 6, 2025

Pelosi has represented San Francisco in the U.S. House of Representatives since 1987.

Her time in Congress began with the AIDS crisis, and she has kept up the fight ever since, as the Washington Blade reported in an exclusive and wide-ranging 2023 interview conducted just after she left House leadership. 

Some excerpts from that interview:

“After committing herself and Congress to the fight against HIV/AIDS during her first speech from the floor of the House in 1987, Pelosi said some of her colleagues asked whether she thought it wise for her feelings on the subject to be “the first thing that people know about you” as a newly elected member.

“They questioned her decision not because they harbored any stigma, but rather for concern over how “others might view my service here,” Pelosi said. The battle against HIV/AIDS, she told them, “is why I came here.”

“It was every single day,” she said. 

“Alongside the “big money for research, treatment, and prevention” were other significant legislative accomplishments, such as “when we] were able to get Medicaid to treat HIV [patients] as Medicaid-eligible” rather than requiring them to wait until their disease had progressed to full-blown AIDS to qualify for coverage, said Pelosi, who authored the legislation.

“That was a very big deal for two reasons,” she said. First, because it saved lives by allowing low-income Americans living with HIV to begin treatment before the condition becomes life-threatening, and second, because “it was the recognition that we had this responsibility to intervene early.”

“Other milestones in which Pelosi had a hand include the Housing Opportunities for People with AIDS program, President Bush’s PEPFAR (President’s Emergency Plan For AIDS Relief) initiative, the Affordable Care Act (which contains significant benefits for Americans living with HIV/AIDS), and funding for the Ending the Epidemic initiative. 

“Outside the U.S. Capitol building, Pelosi has also been celebrated by the LGBTQ community for signaling her support through, for example, her participation in some of the earliest meetings of the NAMES Project AIDS Memorial Quilt, her meeting with the survivors of the 2016 Pulse nightclub massacre, and her appearance at a host of LGBTQ events over the years.  

“Of course, at the same time, Pelosi has been a constant target of attacks from the right, which in the past few years have become increasingly violent. During the siege of the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, her office was ransacked by insurrectionists who shouted violent threats against her. A couple of weeks later, unearthed social media posts by far-right Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (Ga.) revealed she had signaled support for executing Pelosi along with other prominent House Democrats. And last October, the speaker’s husband Paul Pelosi suffered critical injuries after he was attacked by a man wielding a hammer who had broken into the couple’s San Francisco home. 

“Pelosi told CNN last week that her husband is “doing OK,” but expects it will “take a little while for him to be back to normal.”

“Among her fans in progressive circles, Pelosi – who has been a towering figure in American politics since the Bush administration – has become something of a cultural icon, as well. For instance, the image of her clapping after Trump’s State of the Union speech in 2019 has been emblazoned on coffee mugs.

“What is so funny about it,” Pelosi said, is rather than “that work [over] all these years as a legislator,” on matters including the “Affordable Care Act, millions of people getting health care, what we did over the years with HIV/AIDS in terms of legislation, this or that,” people instead have made much ado over her manner of clapping after Trump’s speech. And while the move was widely seen as antagonistic, Pelosi insisted, “it was not intended to be a negative thing.” 

“Regardless, she said, “it’s nice to have some fun about it, because you’re putting up with the criticism all the time – on issues, whether it’s about LGBTQ, or being a woman, or being from San Francisco, or whatever it is.” 

Human Rights Campaign President Kelley Robinson in a statement said there “will never be another Nancy Pelosi.”

“Throughout her career, Speaker Emerita Pelosi has remained a tireless champion for LGBTQ+ equality and worked alongside LGBTQ+ advocates to pass historic legislation that expanded access to health care, protected marriage equality, honored Matthew Shepard with federal hate crimes protections and ended ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,’” said Robinson. “Her steel spine, allyship and keen insight have served as powerful tools in our shared fight for progress and we are grateful for her unwavering commitment to our community.”

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) described Pelosi as an “iconic, heroic, trailblazing, legendary, and transformational leader” who is “the greatest speaker of all time.” President Donald Trump, for his part, told Peter Doocy that Pelosi’s retirement “is a great thing for America.”

“She was evil, corrupt, and only focused on bad things for our country. She was rapidly losing control of her party, and it was never coming back,” said Trump. “I’m very honored that she impeached me twice and failed miserably twice. Nancy Pelosi is a highly overrated politician.”

Gay California Congressman Mark Takano in a statement said he will “miss” Pelosi “immensely.”

“At a time of extraordinary challenge and change, her leadership has been a constant,” said Takano. “She has guided our caucus and our country through some of our hardest moments. But her legacy reaches far beyond the landmark legislation she passed. It lives in the people she mentored, the values she imparted, and the example she set for every person who believes that politics can still be a force for good.”

Yesterday, on the night of the California statewide special election, polls closed at 8 pm for the vote on Proposition 50, the “Election Rigging Response Act.” The measure was created to combat Texas lawmakers’ plans to redraw their state’s congressional districts ahead of the November 3rd, 2026, midterm elections in order to secure more Republican seats in Congress.

A “yes” vote on Prop 50 would allow California to temporarily redraw its own congressional district maps beginning in 2026, according to the California Voter Information Guide. Since August, Democratic organizers and leaders have been advocating for the passage of the measure as a way to stand up to “cheating” that has been committed by other states.

Last night, over 8 million ballots were counted, and an overwhelming 63.8% of these were votes in favor of Prop 50. In Los Angeles County alone, nearly 2 million ballots were submitted, and 73% of voters sided with passing the measure.

Governor Gavin Newsom celebrated the victory as an act of resistance. “Instead of agonizing over the state of our nation, we organized in an unprecedented way,” he said, in a series of video statements posted online. “We stood tall and we stood firm in response to Donald Trump’s recklessness. And tonight, after poking the bear, this bear roared — with an unprecedented turnout in a special election with an extraordinary result.”

The results have also fueled impassioned LGBTQ+ leaders to keep the fight going, especially as federal legislation continues to put queer and trans communities at risk. “Donald Trump and MAGA Republicans have systematically targeted LGBTQ+ rights, rolling back nondiscrimination protections, erasing our history, and attacking transgender kids and their families,” said Tony Hoang, director of LGBTQ+ civil rights organization Equality California, in a press release. “With the passage of Proposition 50, Californians have sent a clear message: our votes will not be silenced, our voices will not be ignored, and our rights will not be rolled back during a rigged midterm election.” 

Advocates have also stressed that Prop 50 sets a precedent in creating more ground in the ongoing battle for increased rights and protections for queer communities. “Tonight’s victory is critical in the fight to secure a pro-equality majority in Congress,” said Kelley Robinson, president of the Human Rights Campaign, another notable LGBTQ+ civil rights group. “This is a victory powered by communities that refuse to be silenced and are unwavering in their commitment to defending democracy.”

Former Vice President Dick Cheney died of complications from pneumonia and cardio and vascular disease, according to a family statement released Tuesday morning. He was 84. 

Cheney served as vice president under President George W. Bush for eight years and previously as defense secretary under President George H.W. Bush. He also served as a House member from Wyoming and as White House chief of staff for President Gerald Ford. 

“Dick Cheney was a great and good man who taught his children and grandchildren to love our country, and to live lives of courage, honor, love, kindness, and fly fishing,” his family said in a statement. “We are grateful beyond measure for all Dick Cheney did for our country. And we are blessed beyond measure to have loved and been loved by this noble giant of a man.”

Cheney had a complicated history on LGBTQ+ issues; he and wife Lynne had two daughters, Liz Cheney and Mary Cheney, who’s a lesbian. Mary Cheney was criticized by LGBTQ+ advocates for not joining the fight against President George W. Bush’s push for a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage. She later resumed support for LGBTQ+ issues in 2009, including same-sex marriage, after her father left office in 2009. She married her partner since 1992, Heather Poe, in 2012.

In 2010, after leaving office, Cheney predicted “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” would “be changed” and expressed support for reconsideration of the law banning open military service.

In 2013, the Cheney family’s disagreements over marriage equality spilled into the public eye after Liz Cheney announced her opposition to same-sex couples legally marrying. Mary Cheney took to Facebook to rebuke her sister: “Liz – this isn’t just an issue on which we disagree – you’re just wrong – and on the wrong side of history.” Dick and Lynne Cheney were supporters of marriage equality by 2013. Liz Cheney eventually came around years later.

Cheney, a neo-con, was often criticized for his handling of the Iraq war. He was considered one of the most powerful and domineering vice presidents of the modern era. He disappeared from public life for years but re-emerged to help Liz Cheney in her House re-election bid after she clashed with President Trump. Dick Cheney assailed Trump in a campaign video and later Liz announced that her father would vote for Kamala Harris in the 2024 presidential election.

On Friday night, techno pop remixes surged through a tight block on Santa Monica Boulevard, where hundreds of eager partygoers danced near a pop-up stage. Bass-heavy grooves echoed across neighboring streets as Beetlejuices, angels, and vampires swayed and thumped to the beat.

Oct. 31 marked the arrival of West Hollywood’s annual Halloween Carnaval, one of the county’s citywide celebrations — and one of the most anticipated for queer Angelenos. 

The first Halloween Carnaval was celebrated in 1987, and has since become one of the most awaited nights for local queer celebration. Drag performers donning elaborate costumes and glamorous makeup set the stage ablaze as they strutted, flipped their hair and danced to the cheers of a crowd that grew enormously as the night went on. The energy was infectious, and the Los Angeles Blade was on the scene to photograph some of these moments.

Image captures by Blade reporter Kristie Song.

Texas judges will now be permitted to refuse to officiate same-sex weddings based on their “sincerely held religious beliefs,” following a ruling issued Oct. 24 by the Texas Supreme Court.

The state’s highest court — composed entirely of Republican justices — determined that justices of the peace who decline to marry LGBTQ couples are not violating judicial impartiality rules and therefore cannot be sanctioned for doing so.

In its decision, the court approved an official comment to the Texas Code of Judicial Conduct clarifying that judges may opt out of performing weddings that conflict with their personal religious convictions. This clarification appears to directly conflict with existing provisions that prohibit judges from showing bias or prejudice toward individuals based on characteristics such as race, religion, or sexual orientation.

“It is not a violation of these canons for a judge to publicly refrain from performing a wedding ceremony based upon a sincerely held religious belief,” the court’s comment states.

The original code explicitly bars judges from showing favoritism or discrimination, declaring that they must not “manifest bias or prejudice, including but not limited to bias or prejudice based upon race, sex, religion, national origin, disability, age, sexual orientation, or socioeconomic status.”

The case traces back to McLennan County Justice of the Peace Dianne Hensley, who was publicly reprimanded in 2019 after refusing to marry same-sex couples while continuing to perform ceremonies for heterosexual ones, the Texan reported.

The State Commission on Judicial Conduct found that her actions cast doubt on her ability to act impartially, but Hensley has spent the past six years challenging that reprimand in court, arguing that she was punished for adhering to her Christian beliefs.

In a statement responding to the Oct. 24 ruling, Texas House LGBTQ Caucus Chair Jessica González expressed disappointment with the decision.

“The Texas House LGBTQ Caucus is disappointed, but not surprised, to learn that the Texas Supreme Court is not willing to stand up for the rights of LGBTQIA+ Texans,” she said. “Our right to marriage should never depend on someone else’s religious beliefs. This change in the Judicial Conduct Code will only further erode civil rights in Texas.”

The Texas Supreme Court is also currently reviewing a related matter referred by the 5th U.S. Court of Appeals. That case involves another judge, Keith Umphress, who similarly refused to perform same-sex weddings for religious reasons. The 5th Circuit has asked the Texas justices to clarify whether the state’s judicial conduct code actually forbids judges from publicly declining to officiate same-sex weddings while continuing to perform ceremonies for straight couples — a question that could further define the boundaries between religious liberty and judicial impartiality in Texas.