The White House released the “United States Counterterrorism Strategy” last week, introducing enforcement priorities that include references to people with “extreme transgender ideologies.”

The document is the first executive branch counterterrorism strategy released since former President Joe Biden’s 2021 “National Strategy for Countering Domestic Terrorism,” which largely focused on threats tied to domestic extremism and the Jan. 6 Capitol attack. The Trump-Vance administration’s new strategy instead centers heavily on cartels, Islamist organizations, and what it describes as “violent left-wing extremists.”

The report identifies three primary categories of terror threats facing the U.S.: “Narcoterrorists and Transnational Gangs,” “Legacy Islamist Terrorists,” and “Violent Left-Wing Extremists, including Anarchists and Anti-Fascists.” The strategy repeatedly frames those groups as existential threats to the U.S. and outlines a more aggressive, militarized counterterrorism posture.

The introduction to the report closes with a warning from President Donald Trump referencing counterterrorism operations carried out during his second administration: “We will find you and we will kill you.”

In the section outlining the administration’s counterterrorism priorities, the document argues that federal intelligence, and law enforcement agencies under prior administrations focused on the wrong threats while overlooking violence committed by left-wing extremists. The strategy specifically references transgender ideology while discussing political violence.

“As real threats were ignored or underplayed, Americans have witnessed the politically motivated killings of Christians and conservatives committed by violent left-wing extremists, including the assassination of Charlie Kirk by a radical who espoused extreme transgender ideologies.”

Claims tying a trans person to Kirk’s killing have been disputed, however, and multiple news outlets later retracted or corrected early reports that identified the shooter as trans.

The report later expands on that argument, saying the administration will prioritize targeting “violent secular political groups” it describes as anti-American and “radically pro-transgender.”

“In addition to cartels and Islamist terror groups, our national CT activities will also prioritize the rapid identification and neutralization of violent secular political groups whose ideology is anti-American, radically pro-transgender, and anarchist.”

The rhetoric mirrors claims frequently made by Trump allies and conservative commentators linking trans people and left-wing activism to political violence. However, data compiled by researchers and organizations tracking mass shootings does not support the idea that trans people are responsible for a significant share of such attacks.

Factcheck.org says rhetoric from Trump and several far-right political pundits contradicts available data, noting that the percentage of mass shootings committed by trans people is “exceedingly small.”

Despite the lack of evidence supporting generalized claims about trans people, the president’s son Donald Trump, Jr., told Fox News in September 2025 that he could not “name a mass shooting in the last year or two in America that wasn’t committed by, you know, a transgender lunatic.”

Factcheck.org also found that even if cases involving shooters with unclear gender identities were included in statistics about trans mass shooters, the number would still account for only a fraction of a percent.

Mark Bryant, founding executive director of the Gun Violence Archive, said the number of trans mass shooters could be as high as eight, but would still account for less than 0.1 percent of mass shootings over the last 12 years, according to GVA data. He added that the figure would remain below 0.2 percent even when examining incidents from 2018 to the present.

Beyond domestic extremism, the strategy frames the administration’s broader counterterrorism agenda through the lens of “America First” foreign policy and renewed U.S. dominance in the Western Hemisphere. The report repeatedly references the Monroe Doctrine, the nearly 200-year-old policy warning European powers against interference in the Americas.

“After years of neglect, the United States will reassert and enforce the Monroe Doctrine to restore American preeminence in the Western Hemisphere, and to protect our homeland” Trump said in the report.

The document also breaks down counterterrorism priorities by region, including the Middle East, where it argues the U.S. is “no longer as dependent” on the region because of increased domestic energy production.

“Our growing domestic energy production means the Middle East is no longer as central to America’s stability, yet threats from this region remain, and our counterterrorism goals continue to be specific and rooted in realistic threat analysis.”

The statement comes amid rising gas prices tied in part to instability surrounding the war involving Iran, with fuel costs reaching some of their highest levels since 2022. According to AAA, the national average price for gasoline climbed to $4.52 per gallon as the national average rose “$.25 for a second straight week.“

U.S. Sen. Edward Markey (D-Mass.) is urging acting Attorney General Todd Blanche and William Marshall III, director of the Federal Bureau of Prisons, to reverse a policy affecting transgender inmates that lawmakers say is “endangering” their “health and safety.”

Markey, along with U.S. Sens. Jeffrey A. Merkley (D-Ore.) and Mazie K. Hirono (D-Hawaii), sent the letter that the Los Angeles Blade verified on Monday.

The letter is a direct response to a change in prison policy that went into effect in February 2025, rolling back Biden-era protections for trans inmates. The senators described how President Trump’s Executive Order 14168, titled “Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government,” forced a policy shift they argue is rooted more in political rhetoric than in medical research or evidence-based correctional practices.

In the letter, the lawmakers wrote “On Feb. 21, 2025, the BOP issued a memo to implement President Trump’s EO, requiring BOP staff to ‘refer to individuals by their legal name or pronouns corresponding to their biological sex,’ banning the use of funds for any ‘items that align with transgender ideology,’ and suspending clothing accommodations, pat search accommodations, and support programs offered to transgender individuals.”

“In a second memo, issued one week later, the BOP banned the use of federal funds for ‘any medical procedure, treatment, or drug for the purpose of conforming an inmate’s appearance to that of the opposite sex.’ These changes have resulted in the denial — or threatened denial — of hormone treatment and gender-affirming accommodations for transgender individuals in BOP custody.”

“On Feb. 19, 2026, the BOP escalated its attacks, issuing a program statement titled, ‘Management of Inmates with Gender Dysphoria.’ It prohibits incarcerated people from receiving gender-affirming care, even if paid for with private funds. This practice forces incarcerated people to discontinue care, regardless of medical recommendations.”

The senators continued, “The agency has repeatedly enacted policies that strip transgender individuals of their gender identity and dignity. This includes requiring staff to refer to transgender individuals by pronouns that ‘align with their biological sex’ rather than gender identity and to confiscate gender-affirming items, such as undergarments, clothing, cosmetics, and wigs.”

“These policies risk triggering mental health crises, including increased suicidality, among incarcerated people with gender dysphoria. The BOP’s repeated guidance to roll back gender-affirming protections — despite a federal court order finding that the BOP’s actions to discontinue gender-affirming care are likely unlawful — generate confusion about the current state of regulations and convey the BOP’s indifference to court orders and the rule of law.”

“By stripping away appropriate medical and psychiatric care, safety protections, and measures to provide dignity, the BOP is exposing transgender individuals to significant harm.”

The Marshall Project, a nonprofit newsroom focused on the U.S. criminal justice system and immigration enforcement through data-driven reporting, also reported on the policy change. The outlet spoke with Shana Knizhnik, an attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union, about the impact of the changes.

“It’s clear that this new policy is a ban on gender affirming healthcare,” Knizhnik, who works for the nationwide chapter of the ACLU said. “This is a policy that disregards the medical needs of our plaintiffs.”

The letter also asked the BOP and the DOJ specific questions regarding why the policy went into effect, as lawmakers suggested the changes appear politically motivated rather than based on new medical evidence regarding treatment for trans inmates.

The senators requested answers to these trans policy-specific questions by May 21, including:

“Does the BOP plan to monitor and assess the impacts of recent policies that eliminate gender-affirming medical and psychiatric care?”

“Since January 20, 2025, how many transgender, nonbinary, intersex, and gender-diverse individuals have been transferred to a different facility to meet the EO’s goal of housing individuals ‘according to their biological sex?’”

“Given that the BOP has stopped enforcing Prison Rape Elimination Act regulations related to gender identity and collecting data on gender identity, how will the BOP protect the physical and emotional health and safety of incarcerated transgender individuals?”

“How does the BOP plan to monitor and assess the impact of eliminating protections against sexual violence for this population?”

“Does the BOP plan to institute a specific process by which transgender individuals may seek assistance or lodge complaints regarding harms they experience from the recent BOP policies and actions implementing President Trump’s EO?”

“Describe the specific criteria the BOP intends to use to determine whether it will allow a ‘social accommodation’ for gender dysphoria.”

Markey also included a personal statement to the Blade explaining why he is using his position on Capitol Hill to push for more information and advocate for reversing the policy.

“This administration continuously shows their contempt for trans people and a total disregard for their rights and humanity. As part of this cruel campaign, the Bureau of Prisons has systematically stripped health care access and basic protections from trans people, abandoning its duty to the people in its custody. I won’t stop fighting until this administration’s hateful anti-trans policies are reversed and trans people’s rights are secured.”

The Blade reached out to the DOJ and the BOP for comment but had not received a response at press time.

As the June 2 primary election looms in California, one of the most crowded races is in State Senate District 24, where 10 candidates, including two out LGBTQ+ candidates, are vying to succeed term-limited Democratic incumbent Ben Allen. The state’s nonpartisan, free-for-all “jungle primaries” mean that the top two candidates will square off in the midterm elections on November 3rd, regardless of party.

Eight of the candidates are Democrats, and two are Republicans, but given the district’s makeup, the seat is likely to stay in Democratic hands. District 24 has a large LGBTQ+ population, as it includes West Hollywood, Santa Monica, the Los Angeles neighborhoods of Bel Air, Brentwood, Hollywood, and more, along with many surrounding communities.

The out candidates seeking the seat are community activist Ellen Evans, a lesbian we interviewed last week, and West Hollywood City Council member John Erickson, a gay man, profiled here.

“I’m running to fix the way we build housing, fund health care, defend democracy and LGBTQ+ rights, fight ICE, and protect reproductive rights,” Erickson said.

Erickson grew up in Ripon, Wis., where he was introduced to activism by his grandmother Gladys. While still in elementary school, he went with her to volunteer at the local food bank and to the state capitol to lobby for veterans’ and women’s rights. After getting a B.A. in English and women’s studies at the University of Wisconsin at Oshkosh, he moved to California to be a teacher and attend graduate school. He received a Ph.D. in American religious history and public policy from the Claremont Colleges, specializing in the disconnect between the faith and LGBTQ+ communities. He’s now an adjunct faculty member at Claremont.

He became an intern for the West Hollywood City Council in 2010 and later a council deputy to then-Mayor Abbe Land (the WeHo mayor is chosen by their fellow City Council members and the position rotates among the members yearly). After that, he was a city staffer focusing on policies and programs involving women’s rights, LGBTQ+ rights, the environment, and civic engagement.

After leaving the city staff, he worked as a legislative representative for the Los Angeles International Airport, vice president of Planned Parenthood Los Angeles, and chief of staff for the Alliance for a Better Community, which advocates for L.A. County Latinos, including efforts to protect immigrants from Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

The latter is his current “day job,” as serving on the City Council is a part-time position—not that it doesn’t take a lot of work. He was first elected to the council in 2020, becoming its youngest member at age 35, and was reelected in 2024, the year he had his first rotation as mayor.

Erickson points to many accomplishments on the WeHo City Council. “I’m the only candidate with a proven track record of courageous legislation,” he said. These include raising the minimum wage, establishing the WeHo Cares program offering behavioral health care to the homeless, protections for senior renters and those with disabilities, and an ordinance for gender-neutral, multi-stall public restrooms with strong privacy protections in newly constructed buildings and those undergoing major renovation.

WeHo’s efforts led the state to pass a similar law on rentals for seniors and people with disabilities, plus a change to the state building code to make the gender-neutral, multi-stall restrooms possible in cities that wanted them. A bill for the latter passed the state legislature unanimously, which was “quite remarkable,” Erickson said.

He also notes his efforts to expand access to HIV prevention drugs and address the Mpox outbreak, plus his work with Planned Parenthood to protect reproductive rights after the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2022 Dobbs decision, which allowed states to ban abortion. He supported California’s moves to strengthen access and protections for those seeking the procedure, including out-of-staters.

In the California State Senate, Erickson said, he would continue to advocate for LGBTQ+ and women’s rights, along with addressing climate change; promoting public transit; reversing a policy freezing enrollment in Medi-Cal, the state’s Medicaid program, for undocumented immigrants; making billionaires pay their fair share to fund needed services; rebuilding after the recent wildfires; and generally standing up to the Trump administration. It’s shameful, he said, that Children’s Hospital Los Angeles ended gender-affirming care for trans youth because of the administration’s threats.

Then there’s the affordability crisis. California needs to prioritize solutions, Erickson stressed. “Everyone is struggling in one way or another,” he said. He’d like to ask elected officials to work a minimum wage job, live without a car, and live without health insurance—and then see how they manage.

Erickson would keep advocating for renters, too. He’s the only renter in the race in the majority-renter District 24, and he’d be one of only two renters in the legislature, he said.

Erickson, who is single, recently got some heat from WEHOonline, a digital publication that often criticizes him, because his campaign website doesn’t say he’s gay. He laughed it off, saying, “It’s pretty obvious that I’m a proud and out gay man.” He called WEHOonline “a gossip blog.”

Erickson has also been the subject of attack ads denouncing his city-funded travel to Paris and the Vatican, which he said was for the legitimate purposes of protecting youth programs and LGBTQ+ athletes ahead of the 2028 Summer Olympics and Paralympics to be held in Los Angeles. The trips were approved in open meetings where the public had a chance to comment, he noted.

West Hollywood will host Pride House, a gathering place for LGBTQ+ athletes, in 2028, and the Paris trip allowed him to see how it worked in that host city in 2024. At the Vatican in 2023, he was able to meet with Pope Francis and advocate for LGBTQ+ rights. He said the ads are funded by crypto-billionaires because of his support for regulating cryptocurrency—and they are “false and malicious.”

Erickson and Evans have both been endorsed by Equality California, the statewide LGBTQ+ organization. Neither of them won the endorsement of the Stonewall Democratic Club; Evans received 57 percent of the membership vote, Erickson 42 percent, but it takes 60 percent to get the endorsement. Erickson did get the endorsement of a separate but similarly named LGBTQ+ group, the Stonewall Young Democrats.

The California Democratic Party endorsed Dr. Sion Roy, a physician at Harbor-UCLA Medical Center and vice chair of the Santa Monica College Board. Roy, a straight man, doesn’t mention LGBTQ+ rights on his campaign website, but he recently spoke in support of gender-affirming care for trans youth in an interview with The Orange County Register.

In addition to being an out and proud gay man, Erickson is an out and proud Catholic. In his visit with Pope Francis, he was part of a delegation from an international educational group founded by the pope. He praises Pope Francis as well as his successor, Pope Leo XIV.

“What Pope Francis did for the LGBTQ community and trans community was pretty amazing for a church that moves in decades rather than years,” Erickson said. “I’m not saying I agree with all the policies of the church, but I’m very impressed with two progressive popes.”

For more information on John Erickson’s race for California State Senate District 24, please visit his campaign website.

By Trudy Ring. This is a cross-post from Karen’s LGBTQ+ Freedom Fighters Substack.

Hungarian Prime Minister Péter Magyar took office on Saturday.

Magyar’s center-right Tisza party on April 12 defeated then-Prime Minister Viktor Orbán’s Fidesz-KDNP coalition. Vice President JD Vance less than a week before the election traveled to Budapest, the Hungarian capital, and urged Hungarians to support Orbán.

Orbán had been in office since 2010. He and his government faced widespread criticism over its anti-LGBTQ+ crackdown.

The European Commission in 2022 sued Hungary, which is a member of the EU, over the country’s anti-LGBTQ+ propaganda law. The European Union’s top court, the EU Court of Justice, on April 21 struck down the statute.

The EU while Orbán was office withheld upwards of €35 billion ($41.26) in funds to Hungary in response to concerns over corruption, rule of law, and other issues.

Hungarian lawmakers in March 2025 passed a bill that banned Pride events and allowed authorities to use facial recognition technology to identify those who participate in them. MPs later amended the Hungarian constitution to ban public LGBTQ+ events.

Upwards of 100,000 people last June defied the ban and marched in Budapest’s annual Pride parade.

“Congratulations to [Péter Magyar] on becoming prime minister of Hungary,” said European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen on X.

“This Europe Day, our hearts are in Budapest,” she added. “The hope and promise of renewal is a powerful signal in these challenging times.”

“We have important work ahead of us,” noted von der Leyen. “For Hungary and for Europe, we are moving forward together.”

Getting around our car-infested city just got a little bit easier.

On Friday, May 8, hundreds of Metro board members and Los Angeles County officials gathered at the Petersen Automotive Museum to celebrate the D Line’s new service to three stations. It’s the latest effort – albeit a long overdue one – to expand L.A. public transportation through the heart of the city. LA Blade was on the scene.

With stations connecting Western Avenue to La Cienega Boulevard, the new line now makes travel from Beverly Hills to Downtown Los Angeles possible in 21 minutes, according to Metro officials. To celebrate the project’s commitment to connecting people to culture, the ribbon-cutting ceremony was followed by a celebratory outdoor event with local food vendors.

CEO Stephanie Wiggins addressed why the L.A. Metro “might just be having a moment” right now: “When gas prices are off the charts, traffic feels endless and parking costs are more than your lunch – $1.75 a ride that gets you pretty much anywhere in the region starts to look pretty smart.”

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Mayor Karen Bass (@mayorofla)

Getting to West Hollywood by transit – a vital spot for the city’s queer culture and nightlife – is another goal for the county. But there’s still a ways to go: construction on an official station isn’t expected to start until 2041.

While the D Line expansion was made possible by a grant from the federal government, L.A. Mayor Karen Bass said at the press conference that “we don’t wait for the federal government. We know we can’t depend on others. Obviously, we need the federal government and the state government, but Angelenos say we are going to tax ourselves to do what is needed.”

This expansion comes as L.A. invests billions of dollars in public transportation ahead of the 2026 FIFA World Cup, 2027 Super Bowl, and 2028 Olympics – all events placing an extra spotlight on one of the busiest cities in the country. Just last June, a metro stop opened at LAX, connecting residents and visitors to L.A’s main airport.

As L.A. tries to catch up with the public transportation infrastructure of major hubs like New York City, one speaker also took the opportunity to address tensions with the nation’s capital:

“I will tell you, being in D.C., there is such an attack against California coming from Washington right now, and against transit across the nation,” U.S. Rep. Laura Friedman said. “And we are here to show Washington that while you know who is tweeting at 3 a.m., we have Angelenos underground building things for this country. We are showing that transit is essential, and we are not going to let Washington defund our children’s future.”

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (@metrolosangeles)

Ongoing construction for the L.A. Metro continues as the city hopes to make big on its “28 Projects by 2028” promise. But for now, residents can enjoy free rides all weekend long, along with 60 days of activations and events at the three new stations.

“I am looking forward to being at the ribbon cutting in a few more years as we move forward and take this line all the way to Westwood,” Bass said. “We celebrate something that Angelenos deserve – a city that’s easier to move through, easier to connect in, and that’s built for the future.”

A report the Vatican released on Tuesday acknowledges LGBTQ+ Catholics have felt isolated within the church.

The report, which the Vatican’s General Secretariat of the Synod’s Study Group 9 released, includes testimony from two married gay Catholics from the U.S. and Portugal.

“Regarding the resistances — limiting ourselves to those emerging from the lived experiences shared with us — we wish to highlight the following: the solitude, anguish, and stigma that accompany persons with same-sex attractions and their families, not only in society but also within the church; this is often linked to the temptation to hide in a ‘double life,'” reads the report. “Within this problematic outlook lie the positions expressed in the pressure to undergo reparative therapies or, even more gravely, in the simplistic advice to enter the sacrament of marriage.”

“At the root of both the emerging openings and the persisting resistances, it seems possible to identify a difficulty in coordinating pastoral practice and the doctrinal approach. Other testimonies received by our study group from believers with same-sex attractions further confirm how arduous it is for individuals and Christian communities to reconcile “doctrinal firmness” with “pastoral welcome,'” it adds.

The report appears to criticize so-called conversion therapy. It also states “every person, first and foremost, is singular, irreducible, irreplaceable, and original” and “this is the meaning of the Biblical-theological theme of the human being, male and female, created in the image and likeness of God.”

The National Catholic Reporter notes “a group of theologians, including bishops, priests, a sister and a layperson” the Vatican commissioned “to study ‘controversial’ issues that Pope Francis’s Synod on Synodality raised wrote the report.

Francis in 2023 launched the multi-year synod to examine on ways to reform the church.

The Argentine-born pontiff died in April 2025. Pope Leo XIV, who was born in Chicago, succeeded him.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio on Thursday met with Leo at the Vatican. The meeting took place against the backdrop of increased tensions between the U.S. and the Holy See over the Iran war.

LGBTQ+ Catholic groups largely welcome report

LGBTQ+ Catholic groups welcomed the report; even though it will not change church teachings on homosexuality, marriage, and gender identity.

“It was a really bold choice to make LGBTQ issues — or homosexuality — one of the case studies,” Brian Flanagan, a senior fellow at New Ways Ministry, a Maryland-based LGBTQ+ Catholic organization, told the Los Angeles Blade on Wednesday during a telephone interview.

Flanagan is also the John Cardinal Cody Chair of Catholic Theology at Loyola University in Chicago.

“They (the study group) could have punted and said something easier,” he said. “Instead, they’re putting what was frankly one of the hottest issues leading up to and after the Synod and addressing it more head on.”

New Ways Ministry Executive Director Francis DeBernardo in a statement described the report as a “breath of refreshing air, the first acknowledgment that LGBTQ+ issues were taken seriously by the three-year global consultation of all levels of the church.”

“By establishing mechanisms and recommendations to continue dialoguing with LGBTQ+ people, the report is a significant step forward in the church’s process to become a more welcoming place for its LGBTQ+ members,” he said.

Marianne Duddy-Burke, executive director of DignityUSA, an LGBTQ+ Catholic organization, in her own statement said the report “demonstrates a welcome humility and openness to learning from the People of God about people’s lives and faith journeys.”

“It is clear that the study group members understand that the doctrines of the church undermine the deep relationship with God that many LGBTQ+ people have, or try to have, and that this needs to be corrected,” she said. “Church officials have decades of testimony from people who have found their sexual orientation or gender identity to be a blessing and a gift, and their relationships to be sacred. To see this reality reflected and respected in this document is a long-awaited positive step.”

Duddy-Burke added the report largely ignores “the experiences of transgender and nonbinary people.” She further notes it “provides few concrete recommendations and proposes no doctrinal changes.”

“Rather, it calls for dialogue, encounter, and communal theological reflection to shape how the Catholic Church moves forward in addressing doctrine and pastoral practice,” said Duddy-Burke. “The paradigm shift repeatedly called for in this report is a significant and very welcome change. Experience, especially of those most impacted, must be key to developing dogma.”

Former U.S. Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.), who served in the House from 1981 until his retirement in 2013 and who became the first member of Congress to voluntarily come out as gay in 1987, has resurfaced in the news over the past two weeks after announcing he has entered home hospice care and plans to publish a new book on, among other things, how Democrats can and should regain control of Congress.

 According to media reports and an interview Frank conducted this week with the Washington Blade, his book, entitled “The Hard Path to Unity: Why We Must Reform the Left to Rescue Democracy,” calls on the Democratic Party’s progressive left leaning members to be more strategic in pushing for laws and policies initially considered “politically unacceptable” to most U.S. voters and the American people.

Frank told the Blade he believes the LGBTQ rights movement has succeeded in advancing most of its agenda seeking protections against discrimination by initially pushing less controversial advances such as the end to the ban on gays in the military and non-discrimination in employment before taking on the more controversial issue of same-sex marriage.

While acknowledging that Congress has yet to pass a national law banning discrimination against LGBTQ people in employment, housing, and public accommodations as 22 states and D.C. have already done, he points to the two landmark U.S. Supreme Court decisions, one legalizing same-sex marriage nationwide in Obergefell v. Hodges in 2015, and the other declaring sexual orientation and gender identity are protected categories for which employment discrimination is prohibited under existing federal law in Bostock v. Clayton County in 2020.

Frank notes that while some in the LGBTQ community are fearful that LGBTQ rights are under attack and may be pulled back under the Trump administration, he believes Republicans in Congress at this time will not attempt to repeal any existing LGBTQ protections, especially those regarding marriage rights and employment protections secured by the Supreme Court rulings.

He says transgender rights are the remaining LGBTQ issue that have yet to be adopted rationally, and he fully supports ongoing efforts to advance trans rights. But like his criticism of the progressive left among Democrats, Frank says the efforts to advance trans rights could be jeopardized by the highly controversial issue of “male to female transgender people playing in women’s sports.” 

He added, “That’s the most controversial, the most difficult. It affects the fewest number of people.” While he says trans rights supporters should continue to advocate for that, “they should not make it a litmus test and say well if you’re not for that you’re not a supporter of the rights of transgender people. There are places where people are supportive, and we want to encourage that.”

Frank, 86, told Politico he has entered home hospice care as he deals with ongoing congestive heart failure. He said he is remaining in his home in Ogunquit, Maine, where he has lived with his husband, Jim Ready, since retiring from Congress in 2013.

“I’ve been doing some writing. I wrote this book,” Frank told the Blade. “I’ve relaxed. Meanwhile, my health has been failing. Jim has been a saint in taking care of me,” he said. “And so, I take it easy.”

Frank spoke to the Washington Blade in a phone interview from his home on May 4.

Washington Blade: We’re hearing some interesting reports about the book you’ve been writing. Can you say when it will be published?

 Barney Frank: Sept. 15 is the publication date.

Blade: Some of the reports about the book in the media have said you want the far left within the Democratic Party to be more cautious.

Frank: No, I’ll give you this. The job is to defeat populism to keep democracy. Clearly you have to know what caused it. I believe that the essential cause in the surge of populism was economic inequality and the failure of mainstream liberals to address inequality. And beginning in the ‘80s economic growth became less and less fair in its institutions. And that led to all this anger.

So, the mainstream left finally figured that out after [Bernie] Sanders and Trump in ’16.  So, we then – because I was working to make that change – got the Democrats to pay attention to economic inequality. And Joe Biden’s program did. The problem is at that point, people on the left who had correctly been critical of the failure to address equality said, OK, that’s not the only problem you guys are missing. There are all these other problems.

And they jumped from being right on the question of inequality and equality to believing in a lot more social changes, some of which were just unacceptable to the public. And the mistake they make is they don’t distinguish – there are a lot of issues I’ve been for in my life, but I had to assert that they were not currently politically survivable.

So, you do two things. Those that are politically survivable work to get them done. Others, you become an advocate. But you don’t make the most controversial part of your agenda litmus tests and drive away your allies. You will remember that on marriage that was an issue and in 2000 they insisted you will be for marriage.

So, my thesis is that while the mainstream understood its mistake on inequality, the most militant and ideological of our left misunderstand public opinion and they are pushing the public to — and they are insisting on acceptance of things that are not politically acceptable.

Blade: Having said what you said, how do you see that impacting gay rights or LGBTQ rights? 

Frank: Well in the first place, gay rights – one of the things I want to address – is this fear that gay rights are going to be taken away – rights for LGB people. Nonsense. We’re not going to lose any of those rights. If they tried to undo marriage, for instance, the political reaction they would get would be abortion type sentiment. They are just not going to do that because it causes them too many political problems.

The problem is advances we hope to make in the area of transgender people. But there is no chance of losing – I can’t think of a single right that is in jeopardy. They are not going to reintroduce the ban in the military. They’re not going to tell people their marriages are cancelled. Again, the Republicans are not even trying to do that because they know there would be a terrible backlash. 

With regard to LGBT there is one analogy. And that is the most controversial issue we faced over the years on what was the gay-bisexual agenda was same-sex marriage. And we left that until the end. And you remember we did the military. We did ENDA. We moved on to everything else, and it wasn’t until the very end that we went into marriage. [NOTE: ENDA did not ultimately pass.]

I think the analogy to that is male to female transgender people playing in women’s sports. That’s the most controversial, the most difficult. It affects the fewest number of people. And I believe had we deferred on marriage — people who believe that’s important should advocate for it. But they should not make it a litmus test and say well if you’re not for that you’re not a supporter of the rights of transgender people. There are places where people are supportive, and we want to encourage that.

Blade: You said you don’t think we will lose any rights, most of the laws related to nondiscrimination are from the states or municipal laws that were passed.

 Frank: Tell me what you think will be lost. You and I always have this problem. I’ve always felt you were cynical and skeptical. Tell me what right we now have that’s in jeopardy.

Blade: One would be if the Supreme Court reverses its decision on same-sex marriage.

Frank: If they do, Congress would now step in on that, which would be the passage of Tammy Baldwin’s bill.

Blade: But what I was going to ask you next is in all the years you’ve been in office and as of now a federal LGBTQ rights bill has not been passed by Congress yet. Is there a chance of that happening?

Frank: I do not think it will happen because the members of Congress do not want to be in the position of voting to cancel people’s marriages. There are valid marriages throughout the country. And the notion that Congress will pass a bill invalidating those, no they won’t. They won’t do anything that’s as disruptive and that will cause a strong reaction. Have you seen a federal bill to do that? I haven’t.

Blade: No, and I am sorry if I’m not putting the question across correctly. I’m talking about the bill that bans discrimination based on employment, public accommodations and other areas for LGBTQ people that Congress has not yet passed. You co-sponsored that for many years.

Frank: I know that, and the Supreme Court did that one. No, I don’t think that – oh, all right, that’s a different question than marriage. If the Supreme Court reverses itself on that – I don’t see any sign that they’re going to, then I think you would see the federal bill passed.

 [He is referring to the 2020 U.S. Supreme Court decision that employment discrimination against gay, bi, and trans people was equivalent to sex discrimination, which is prohibited under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.]

Blade: Are you talking about marriage?

Frank: For both for marriage and for non-[discrimination] – I don’t think a marriage bill would pass nationally. To distinguish, I don’t think a bill striking down marriages would pass. Too much violent reaction. As to employment discrimination, where they haven’t acted yet, if the Supreme Court changes that – I think that’s extremely unlikely – then I think Congress would step in.

Blade: Are you saying we may not need an LGBTQ non-discrimination act by Congress for the states that haven’t passed that?

Frank: I would be in favor of that, yes. But again, I think you and I – you have always been pessimistic. There is a political time now that works in our favor. And as I said, on abortion, they burned themselves very badly on abortion. And yes, I’m still for a national anti-discrimination bill. But I do not think the right wing wants to be caught taking rights away that already exist. Because that’s a lot harder than denying them in the first place. And I don’t see any movement for that. You tell me what you are worried about. What bills are you worried about? 

Blade: I was simply saying they haven’t yet passed a federal non-discrimination bill. 

Frank: No, what’s going to change on the Supreme Court? I don’t see a pretty quick reversal on the Supreme Court. So, I think people are just – they have to have a cause. And they are inflating the likelihood that we are going to lose some rights when I see no evidence of it. And in fact, I see a lot of political reasons why those in Congress don’t want to do that.

I’ll tell you there are a lot of Republicans who would vote for same-sex marriage. For example, the leadership would say for Christ’s sake, don’t bring that up. They don’t want to take a position on it. And they got burned on abortion, badly. 

Blade: To the extent that you are observing this, do you think the LGBTQ rights organizations are doing what they should be doing?

Frank: Well, I think some are stressing the negative too much. Because when people believe nothing good ever happens, they may get discouraged. I think they should be concentrating on the transgender issue. And I know the most controversial parts are protecting people’s rights to medical care, their rights selecting their own gender. And that’s what I would be working on. 

And yeah, it would be nice to pass the national bill. I don’t think that’s going to happen. Well, if the Democrats get the House, the Senate, and the presidency, maybe it will happen. But I don’t see the urgency of that because I don’t see any movement to reverse the Supreme Court’s decision.

Blade: What message would you have for the LGBTQ community?

Frank: My message is one, we’re in good shape. And two, that what remains in the transgender issue – who is first? Which are those of your issues that are the most politically acceptable. And you work your way through and as you win on some of those the resistance on the tougher ones will diminish. And the other issue is we are – the problem is the stand to protect the rights of transgender people. But the rights for lesbian, gay, and bisexual people, I do not think they are in jeopardy and I do not think a lot of resources should be spent on being what I think is a very small threat.

Blade: For those states and municipalities that do not have laws protecting LGBTQ people from discrimination, do you think attitudes are changing so there would be little or no discrimination?

Frank: Oh, no question. First of all, I think it’s very unlikely that any of the rights they have will be taken away. And secondly, if they had to take some positive steps to take away protections they would not do it. And I think that ship has sailed in our direction and isn’t going back. In the end, you cannot underestimate there’s a big political difference between denying people their rights in the first place and taking it away from them after they’ve enjoyed it.

Anything is theoretically possible, but I don’t see any evidence that’s likely to happen.

Blade: We’re coming up to the midterm elections this year, but is there anyone coming up in the next presidential election who you might be supporting?

Frank: Oh, I think at this point we’re going to have a fairly open Democratic process. And it’s very clear at this point the way American politics is going it will be a basically supportive Democrat against a basically opposed Republican. And I’ll be supporting the Democrat. And so, this Democrat would be the best one, the most electable. And which one, I haven’t decided that. I want to see how people will fare when they start running.

But I think it is inconceivable that the Democrats would nominate someone who is not fully supportive.

Blade: Some people might be asking what you have been doing since you retired from Congress.

Frank: I’ve been doing some writing. I wrote this book. I’ve relaxed. Meanwhile, my health has been failing. Jim [husband Jim Ready] has been a saint in taking care of me. And so, I take it easy. In terms of what I do, I have two rules, two pieces of advice for people who retire. One is that you should make up two lists. One is you should have a bucket list, a list of things you want to do before you’re through. But more important than the bucket list is a list that rhymes with bucket. That’s a very important list. And that’s one that I increasingly defer to.

Blade: And what is the one other than bucket?

Frank: It rhymes with bucket. What rhymes with bucket?

Blade: Oh, OK.

Frank: That’s the list I follow.

Following the passage of anti-DEI legislation in Florida, Key West will no longer receive any state funding for its future Pride events.

In a letter provided to the Key West Business Guild, the LGBTQ+ visitor and tourism center for the string of islands, a senior assistant county attorney for Monroe County officially said that the organization would no longer receive funding for its ongoing projects as a result of Senate Bill 1134 and House Bill 1001, starting in 2027.

The popular Key West Pride, gay men–leaning Tropical Heat weekend, and Womenfest will no longer receive any state money. This is something that Gay Key West Visitor Center Executive Director Rob Dougherty highlighted will shift how all the largest LGBTQ+ events in the Keys will be held after this year.

He said that the explanation is solely a result of SB 1134 and HB 1001, which limits the official actions of local governments by “prohibiting counties and municipalities, respectively, from funding or promoting or taking official action as it relates to diversity, equity, and inclusion …”

The legislation is being used to impose restrictions on funding events that exclude — whereas the events’ true purpose is to uplift already marginalized groups.

“Womenfest lost it [funding] because it’s a women’s-only event. Tropical Heat lost it because it’s a men’s-only event … that’s how this is being applied.”

This will not impact anything this year, Dougherty assured the Los Angeles Blade; however, the future is not as certain.

“The law that (Republican Florida) Gov. DeSantis signed does not go into effect until Jan. 1, so for 2026 we’re okay,” Dougherty told the Blade. “But it impacts Key West Pride 2027, it impacts Tropical Heat 2027 and Womenfest — so we have lost all funding for those three events.”

He said that this will amount to a large chunk of the expected funding for the LGBTQ+ celebrations, which the Key West tourism board says is “internationally known as a gay mecca.”

“We’re due to lose about $200,000. Not all of that is direct, but the way that the Tourist Development Council (TDC) distributes their money, about $75,000 of it is for Key West Pride, and that helps to pay for things like marketing, swag, and other things that promote the event.”

He went on to explain that marketing to many major metropolitan areas with large LGBTQ+ populations may not see the same Key West advertisements and push as in years past — and that is the point.

“Our digital marketing, our print marketing, our SEO marketing — all of that is paid for through there, and it targets places with direct flights like Washington, D.C., New York, Philly, Atlanta, Dallas. So it’s definitely going to impact that.”

The money that will stop coming is not just to run events and celebrations, he explained. Money that goes back directly into the community is going to be hardest hit.

“An estimated 250,000 LGBTQ+ travelers make it to Key West on an annual basis, and on a very conservative basis, for every LGBTQ+ person there are two to four allies traveling with the same values.”

“The TDC also estimates that $1,500+ is spent per person per visit … so if you take those figures and multiply those all together, it comes up to about $1.2 billion … that is potentially going to be lost.”

He says that this will intrinsically change how Key West’s tourism — especially the large LGBTQ+ side of it — will run, especially since gay vacations need a foundation and expectation of safety and support to blossom.

“We travel based upon where we feel most welcome,” Dougherty said. “Key West has always been its own little place … the LGBTQ+ history of Key West and everything about Key West has always been a little bit weird for people, and that’s why they come here.”

The Guild was formed in 1978 to encourage summer tourism and support Key West’s gay community — becoming the nation’s first LGBTQ+ destination marketing organization. It has grown tremendously from its original membership to now include more than 475 enterprises representing virtually every facet of the island’s business community.

He also went on to say that this should be eye-opening for anywhere considered an LGBTQ+ destination, regardless of whether it is in a blue state or a red one.

“I think it can be a wake-up call across the country, because if it can happen here, it can happen anywhere.”

The U.S. Department of Education announced on Monday that it opened an investigation into Smith College for admitting transgender women.

Smith College, a private and famously all-women’s college in Northampton, Mass., established in 1871 and opened in 1875, has a long list of women who make up its historic alumni — including first ladies, influential political figures, and cultural leaders.

The DOE released a statement about the investigation into the institution through the Department’s Office for Civil Rights, saying it was looking into the possibility that Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 was violated by allowing trans women, referred to in the statement as “biological males,” into women’s intimate spaces protected by IX.

The statement explicitly highlighted that this stems from trans women being granted “access to women-only spaces, including dormitories, bathrooms, locker rooms, and athletic teams” while also allowing their audience into the school itself.

This is the first time the Trump-Vance administration has taken a step into admissions processes, a stark jump past investigating policies that allowed trans women to participate in women’s sports and use women’s bathrooms, and allows for the administration to go more after trans acceptance policy as a whole.

Smith’s admission policy allows for “any applicants who self-identify as women,” including “cis, trans, and nonbinary women,” according to the college’s website, and has since 2015, when it updated its policy.

“The college is fully committed to its institutional values, including compliance with civil rights laws,” Smith’s statement in response to the DOE’s investigation said. “The college does not comment on pending government investigations.”

“An all-women’s college loses all meaning if it is admitting biological males,” said Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights Kimberly Richey. “Allowing biological males into spaces designed for women raises serious concerns about privacy, fairness, and compliance under federal law. The Trump administration will continue to uphold the law and fight to restore common sense.”

This move continues to align with actions the Trump-Vance administration has taken to curtail LGBTQ+ — and specifically trans — rights in America, as members of the administration attempt to break down safeguards and protections that have long been used to protect marginalized communities.

Since Trump took office in his second term, there have been significant legal challenges. According to the National LGBTQ+ Bar Association, there are over 35 court cases that have emerged since his second swearing-in that directly relate to the administration’s attempts to minimize the rights and protections of trans Americans — from medical care and educational protections to military policy.

Much of this anti-trans policy direction was outlined beginning in 2022 with the Project 2025 playbook, which Trump officials have used as a guide to scale back protections for LGBTQ+ people, Black Americans, poor and Indigenous communities, while also increasing costs for lower-income Americans and providing tax cuts to the wealthy and ultra-wealthy. The plans also “erode” Americans’ freedoms and remove crucial checks and balances that have allowed the executive branch to remain in line with the Constitution without becoming too powerful over either the courts or the legislative branch.

A little over a year ago, it looked as if Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass, the city’s first woman mayor, would easily win reelection in 2026. But criticism of her handling of the disastrous wildfire in the Pacific Palisades neighborhood in early 2025 has thrown the mayoral race wide open.

As the mayoral primary looms on June 2 and a debate is set for Tuesday night, 14 candidates are vying for the seat, and there are some competitive City Council races as well. Big bucks have poured into the city races, according to the Los Angeles Times, and progressive forces may be looking to repeat the success of Democratic Socialist Zohran Mamdani’s election as New York City mayor last year. In Los Angeles city races, a candidate who wins more than 50 percent of the vote in the primary is elected outright; otherwise, the top two vote recipients face each other in the November general election.

Bass, a former member of Congress, and businessman Rick Caruso advanced to the general election in 2022, in which she bested him by 55 percent to 45 percent. This year, her top rivals in the primary are City Council member Nithya Raman, running to the left of Bass; community organizer Rae Huang, also on the left; software entrepreneur Adam Smith, a moderate; and reality TV personality Spencer Pratt, courting conservative voters. The race is officially nonpartisan, but all the leading mayoral candidates are Democrats, except for Pratt, a Republican.

Bass was in Ghana when the Palisades fire started, and many residents found her response wanting, the L.A. Times notes. Twelve people died as a result of the fire, and thousands of homes were lost. The mayor ended up firing out lesbian fire chief Kristin Crowley, who sued the city, accusing Bass of orchestrating “a campaign of retaliation to conceal the extent to which Bass undermined public safety and transparency,” according to ABC7 Eyewitness News.

Bass leads in the mayoral polls, but many of those surveyed disapprove of her performance, according to a poll by UC Berkeley and the Times. Still, as she touts reductions in homelessness and homicides in the city, she has drawn support from major donors and celebrities. She received perhaps her biggest endorsement Monday—from Kamala Harris. Harris released a statement saying Bass “is the leader Los Angeles needs right now,” multiple media outlets report.

Bass’ big individual contributors include Hollywood producers J.J. Abrams and David Miner, actor Samuel L. Jackson, and philanthropist Edythe Broad, L.A.’s NBC affiliate reports, and the Times analysis shows her far ahead in fundraising.

But Raman may be a formidable candidate from the left—and L.A.’s police union is worried. Raman has been elected to two terms on the council with the support of the Democratic Socialists of America, which touts New York’s Mamdani as a member. The Democratic Socialists haven’t made an endorsement in the L.A. mayoral primary, although many of the group’s members favor Raman. But the Los Angeles Police Protective League, which represents rank-and-file officers, is spending heavily on ads against Raman, who opposed the police pay increases backed by Bass.

The union has spent $400,000 in its anti-Raman campaign so far and plans to spend more than $1 million overall, according to the Times. A recent video ad denounces her opposition to a city ordinance saying homeless people can’t camp within 500 feet of a school.

“Raman has voted over 75 times to allow homeless camps next to schools, daycares, parks, and other sensitive locations, undermining public safety,” the video’s narrator states.

Raman responded with a video defending her record, saying the police pay raises were more than the city could afford and that other services had to be cut “to the bone.”

The police union tried to defeat Raman in her run for reelection to the City Council in 2024 but failed. The union opposed Bass in 2022 and endorsed Caruso, but she and the Protective League are considerably friendlier now.

Another union that has been active in the city races is Unite Here Local 11, which represents more than 32,000 workers in the L.A. area, mostly in the hospitality industry. It endorsed Bass in 2022 but hasn’t endorsed in the mayoral race yet this year. The union, which is familiar to West Hollywood politicians, did not respond to a request for comment.

However, Unite Here Local 11 has endorsed in three City Council races: Eunisses Hernandez in Council District 1, Faizah Malik in District 11, and Hugo Soto-Martinez in District 13.

Malik’s race has been particularly heated. She is challenging incumbent Traci Park. Local 11 “has been furious with Park, who voted against a hike in the minimum wage for tourism workers to $30 per hour,” the Times reports. Park contended that the higher wage would cost many workers their jobs.

Unite Here has spent about $340,000 to promote Malik and denounce Park. Malik is also backed by the Democratic Socialists of America.

In its campaign materials, Unite Here has tried to associate Park with Donald Trump and Immigration and Customs Enforcement, something Park, a Democrat, has called “dishonest and disgusting,” according to the Times.

Park, meanwhile, has the support of the Police Protective League and United Firefighters of Los Angeles City Local 112, which together have spent nearly $900,000 toward her reelection.

Two Los Angeles hotels, in partnership with the California Hotel and Lodging Association, have given $300,000 to a political action committee backing Park as well as Maria Lou Calanche against Hernandez, the incumbent, and Jose Ugarte, one of several candidates seeking to succeed Curren Price, who is termed out of the City Council and is facing felony embezzlement charges.

Back to the mayoral race: Chung is a Presbyterian minister who said she’ll cut police funding and work for affordable housing and renters’ protections. Miller has said his business expertise will serve him well as mayor. He’s also focused on housing and created a nonprofit, Better Angels, to address homelessness.

Pratt, who appeared in the reality TV show The Hills, has harshly criticized Bass, Gov. Gavin Newsom, and other politicians. He has called Bass “trash” and denounced homeless encampments, saying L.A. children have to witness “the filth and degeneracy of the homeless drug zombies,” as reported by the Times. He has touted himself on social media as the only candidate with “the will to clear encampments in this city,” and said getting people into treatment for addiction and mental illness has to be the first step toward reducing homelessness.

They and other mayoral candidates will debate at 5 p.m. Wednesday at the Skirball Cultural Center in L.A. KNBC4, the local NBC station, and KVEA, affiliated with Spanish-language Telemundo, will broadcast the one-hour debate live.

Then at 7 p.m. on Wednesday, KNBC and KVEA will host a one-hour debate with California gubernatorial candidates. It will be broadcast on those stations as well as stations in San Francisco, San Diego, Sacramento, and Monterey. Xavier Becerra, formerly California attorney general and Secretary of Health and Human Services under President Joe Biden, has surged in support since U.S. Rep. Eric Swalwell dropped out due to sexual assault allegations.

But a new California Democratic Party poll shows Becerra tied with Republican businessman and Trump-endorsed candidate Steve Hilton, each favored by 18 percent of respondents. The large number of candidates seeking to replace Newsom, who is term-limited, has led some Democrats to fear a Republican could prevail in California’s “jungle primary” system.

Others in the race include former U.S. Rep. Katie Porter, former L.A. Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, and businessman-activist Tom Steyer. Becerra has been endorsed by Equality California, the statewide LGBTQ+ rights group. Equality California has not made endorsements in the L.A. city elections.

There will be another gubernatorial debate Tuesday at 6 p.m. Pacific Time on CNN. Candidates who have qualified are Becerra, Porter, Steyer, Villaraigosa, and Matt Mahan, all Democrats, and Republicans Hilton and Chad Bianco.

By Trudy Ring. This is a cross-post from Karen’s LGBTQ+ Freedom Fighters Substack.