Connect with us

Politics

GOP bill targeting press: ‘plainly inconsistent with 1st Amendment’

The proposal to relax standards required to sue reporters & media organizations for libel “is intended to have a chilling effect on media”

Published

on

Gov. Ron DeSantis (R-Fla.) (Screen capture via YouTube)

WASHINGTON – A bill by Florida Republicans that would relax the standards required for public officials to sue journalists and media organizations for libel is “plainly inconsistent with the First Amendment” according to the acclaimed attorney and constitutional law expert Floyd Abrams.

“The statute is a frontal attack” on the U.S. Supreme Court’s longstanding interpretation of the principles “governing First Amendment libel law as it currently exists,” Abrams told The Washington Blade by phone on Wednesday.

Abrams has represented parties in litigation before the U.S. Supreme Court more than a dozen times in some of the most important and high-profile First Amendment cases brought over the last 50 years, which has led to landmark rulings including on matters governing press freedoms.

Abrams is senior counsel at Cahill Gordon & Reindel, the multinational law firm where he has worked since 1963. He is widely considered among the country’s preeminent litigators and experts in constitutional law and was described by the late diplomat and U.S. Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan (N.Y.) as “the most significant First Amendment lawyer of our age.”

With this Florida statute, Abrams said it appears the state’s Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis and his conservative allies in the legislature are making “an effort to come up with something which will lead the Supreme Court to take another look” at its 1964 ruling in New York Times v. Sullivan, which established that the First Amendment confers certain protections for the press against libel lawsuits by public figures.

The ruling, reaffirmed and developed in subsequent cases over the years, acts as a bulwark preventing powerful public figures including elected officials from weaponizing lawsuits or the threat of litigation to silence or censor reporters and news organizations.  

DeSantis and Florida’s GOP legislators are hardly out of step with leaders in the Republican Party including former President Trump, who repeatedly pledged to change the libel laws so he could more easily sue media companies.

When Sarah Palin, former governor of Alaska and 2008 vice presidential candidate, sued The New York Times for libel in 2016, the paper wrote that advocates for weakening the press’s protections against libel lawsuits were “more emboldened now than at any point” since the Sullivan case. They have ideological allies in the right-wing legal establishment, too: in 2021, conservative Supreme Court Justices Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch expressed an interest in revisiting the court’s ruling in Sullivan.

SCOTUS unlikely to revisit its longstanding approach to First Amendment, libel law

Abrams said if the Florida bill is signed into law, given that “virtually any entity, which reports the news would be imperiled by this statute,” he can envision legal challenges from a variety of entities, from groups like the “ACLU to the Reporters’ Committee [for Freedom of the Press] to organizations of journalists to newspapers.” Litigation over the law’s constitutionality could, of course, reach the Supreme Court.

At the same time, Abrams said he doubts there is much appetite among the justices to abrogate or weaken the decades-old ruling in Sullivan – which stipulates that to bring a successful libel case against the press, public officials must first prove the offending material was defamatory and then show it was published with “actual malice,” either with the knowledge that it was false or with “reckless disregard” for whether it was true.

“I would be very surprised if Chief Justice Roberts is in favor of revisiting New York Times against Sullivan because he has been a strong First Amendment defender,” Abrams said, and based on “Justice Kavanaugh’s opinions when he was on the Court of Appeals, I would be surprised if he is prepared to challenge” Sullivan.

The advertisement published in The New York Times on March 29, 1960, that led to Sullivan’s defamation lawsuit.

Abrams conceded “there may be more reasons to think that one or more conservative jurists” on the Supreme Court could be convinced to join Thomas and Gorsuch’s calls to reconsider libel protections for the press. Working against this effort, however, is the extent to which the Florida statute is inconsistent from the Court’s analysis of the relevant legal questions, Abrams said.

Examples, he said, include:

(1) the proposal’s narrowing of the parameters used to define certain plaintiffs as “public figures” for purposes of First Amendment libel law, a distinction that carries a higher burden of proof than that which is required of private citizens suing members of the press;

(2) its treatment of information attributed to anonymous sources as presumably false, a finding that plaintiffs claiming defamation would otherwise be required to prove; and

(3) its characterization as inherently defamatory any accusations published by the press of discrimination based on race, sex, sexual orientation, or gender identity.

The statute’s presumption that material attributed to anonymous sources is false would undermine the method by which the courts evaluate libel claims brought by public figures, Abrams said: “The Supreme Court has certainly made clear that the legal test requires the party suing to demonstrate the newspaper [or] journalist didn’t believe what he or she was saying.”

Put differently, Abrams said, the analysis turns on the defendant’s state of mind “as a basis for determining if the alleged libel of a public figure is actionable.”

Therefore, Abrams said, to “have a flat presumption that any use of confidential sources will be held against the journalist is inconsistent” with the type of claims that might “lead the Supreme Court to take another look at the law” established with Sullivan.

Censoring criticism of anti-LGBTQ discrimination

Floyd Abrams via Cahill Gordon & Reindel LLP

Likewise with the legislation’s provision that the press’s accusation of discrimination by a public official would constitute prima facie evidence of defamation, Abrams said “The Supreme Court has said more than once, and often in the voice of conservative jurists, that such speech is protected by the First Amendment.”

Florida’s statute goes even further, however. Per the substantial truth doctrine, a defendant accused of defamation can avoid legal liability by showing that the gist of the material at issue in the complaint was true. Under the proposed bill, a journalist who is sued for publishing accusations of discrimination (now considered inherently defamatory) may not cite as evidence of their truth (or substantial truth) the public official’s membership in any religious or scientific organization – even if that organization has a documented pattern and practice of discrimination, or well-known views that are unambiguously sexist, racist, or anti-LGBTQ.  

The bill’s apparent effort to censor media coverage of discrimination by public officials raised red flags with LGBTQ groups like GLAAD, whose President Sarah Kate Ellis said, in a statement shared with The Blade on Wednesday: “Those spewing harmful and inaccurate words do not have the support for their dangerous rhetoric and policies, and they’re rightfully afraid they’ll be held accountable by voters and a free press that accurately reports on efforts to scapegoat and target vulnerable people.”

“This bill is another futile attack on LGBTQ Floridians, a sign of full-blown panic against a rising tide of acceptance for LGBTQ people and for the full equality of women, people of color and queer people of color,” Ellis said.

Florida Capitol complex (Photo Credit: State of Florida)

Jon Harris Maurer, an attorney who serves as public policy director for Equality Florida, the state’s largest LGBTQ advocacy organization, told The Blade by phone on Thursday that based on the alignment of DeSantis and Republicans in the legislature, chances are the bill will be signed into law.

Maurer said Florida’s Republican lawmakers, with supermajorities in both chambers, “have made clear they are prioritizing Gov. DeSantis’s legislative agenda.” At, or at least near, the top of that agenda is the state’s proposal to weaken libel protections for journalists, Maurer said, noting DeSantis’s decision to convene a recent roundtable discussion on the matter where speakers explained their reasons for wanting the Supreme Court to revisit Sullivan.

Other recent high-priority policy items for DeSantis and his allies have focused on using “the LGBTQ community to score political points with a far-right presidential primary base,” Maurer said. Florida’s governor, state lawmakers, or other officials might find the press coverage of these matters unflattering, Maurer said, but that hardly means the coverage is false or even defamatory.

So, the proposal to relax the standards required for public officials to sue reporters and media organizations for libel “is intended to have a chilling effect on media, particularly media that would be critical of Gov. DeSantis and those who share his positions,” Maurer said.

Maurer agreed with Abrams that the bill’s proponents likely have their sights set on the Supreme Court – and that the proposal, as currently written, is totally inconsistent with the Court’s treatment of First Amendment libel law.

If the bill is signed into law and litigation over its constitutionality reaches the Supreme Court, Maurer declined to speculate what the outcome might be. The Court’s conservative justices have scrapped longstanding precedent in other recent cases, he said, noting last year’s ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization that revoked the constitutional right to abortion first established in 1973 with Roe v. Wade.

Removing protections for confidentiality of anonymous sources

Particularly in circumstances that raise national security concerns, the U.S. government has sometimes sought to prevent news organizations from publishing sensitive information in their possession or issued subpoenas demanding that journalists reveal the identities of the confidential sources who leaked it to them.

U.S. Supreme Court (Photo Credit: Michael Key)

In 1971, Abrams successfully represented The New York Times before the Supreme Court in a landmark First Amendment case challenging the Nixon administration’s claims of executive authority to suppress the paper’s publication of confidential documents. The Court’s ruling allowed the Times and other organizations to publish the material, known as the Pentagon Papers, which revealed the Johnson administration had “systematically lied, not only to the public but also to Congress” about America’s political and military involvement in Vietnam.

The government employee responsible for providing the documents to the Times was charged with espionage, though the charges were later dismissed.

The Supreme Court ruled in the 1972 case Branzburg v. Hayes that the First Amendment does not protect reporters from being called to testify before grand juries, but the government must “convincingly show a substantial relation between the information sought and a subject of overriding and compelling state interest.”

The decision was cited by Judge Thomas Hogan of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia in his 2004 memorandum opinion rejecting a motion to rescind grand jury subpoenas issued to two reporters, one represented by Abrams, in connection with criminal investigations of leaks that had revealed the identity of covert CIA operative Valerie Plame Wilson (in what became known as the “Plame affair”).

Abrams’ client, who had not published a story about Plame but learned she was working as a covert CIA operative through a confidential government source, served several months in jail for her refusal to reveal his identity as demanded by the subpoena.

Some courts have upheld the concept that journalists have a constitutional right to conceal the identities of their sources, and some states and jurisdictions have codified these rulings with so-called “shield laws,” which vary in the extent of their protections afforded to members of the press.

Florida’s proposed statute, in addition to presuming that published information attributed to anonymous sources is false, would revoke the state’s shield laws that protect journalists’ right to keep their identities confidential.

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

Congress

Garcia confronts Noem over gay asylum seeker ‘forcibly removed’ to El Salvador

Andry Hernández Romero is makeup artist from Venezuela

Published

on

Andry Hernández Romero (photo credit: Immigrant Defenders Law Center)

California Congressman Robert Garcia on Wednesday asked Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem about the well-being of a gay asylum seeker from Venezuela who the U.S. “forcibly removed” to El Salvador.

The gay Democrat during a House Homeland Security Committee hearing asked Noem whether Andry Hernández Romero is “alive” and whether “we can check and do a wellness check on him.”

“This individual is in El Salvador, and the appeal would be best made to the president and to the government of El Salvador,” Noem told Garcia.

The Trump-Vance administration in March “forcibly removed” Hernández, who asked for asylum because of persecution he suffered due to his sexual orientation and political beliefs, and other Venezuelans from the U.S. and sent them to El Salvador.

The White House on Feb. 20 designated Tren de Aragua, a Venezuelan gang, as an “international terrorist organization.” President Donald Trump on March 15 invoked the Alien Enemies Act of 1798, which the Associated Press notes allows the U.S. to deport “noncitizens without any legal recourse.”

Alvaro M. Huerta, director of litigation and advocacy for the Immigrant Defenders Law Center, a Los Angeles-based organization that represents Hernández, said officials with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and U.S. Customs and Border Protection claimed their client is a Tren de Aragua member because of his tattoos.

The Washington Blade on April 17 reported Hernández was sent to El Salvador’s Terrorism Confinement Center, a maximum-security prison known by the Spanish acronym CECOT.

Garcia, along with U.S. Reps. Maxwell Alejandro Frost (D-Fla.), Maxine Dexter (D-Ore.), and Yassamin Ansari (D-Ariz.) last month met with U.S. Ambassador to El Salvador William Duncan and embassy staffers in San Salvador, the Salvadoran capital. The lawmakers did not visit CECOT, but Garcia told the Blade that the embassy agreed to ask the Salvadoran government to “see how (Hernández) is doing and to make sure he’s alive.”

Continue Reading

California Politics

Zbur continues fight for LGBTQ rights amid Trump attacks

He continues to cement a pro-equality legacy in state legislature

Published

on

Lindsay Melanie

Assemblymember Rick Chavez Zbur (D-51), 68, grew up in a rural farming community
surrounded by animals and land in Rio Grande Valley, New Mexico — ultimately becoming the first person in his rural community to attend an Ivy League university. 

Since then, he has continued to build his reputation as an advocate and as a
political leader in environmental justice and LGBTQ rights. 

Most recently, Zbur introduced Assembly Bill 309, which would support
California’s strategy to prevent the spread of HIV and viral hepatitis by preserving existing laws that increase access to sterile syringes at no added cost to the state. 

“Extensive research and data collection has repeatedly proven that increased access to sterile syringes significantly lowers rates of transmission and saves lives
without increasing rates of drug use,” said Zbur when presenting AB 309. 

He added that the average estimated cost for lifetime medical costs related to HIV treatment for one person is $326,500. “Syringe access not only saves lives, but it also saves individuals and the state from the steep cost of treatment,” he continued. 

As a gay man in the peak of the AIDS crisis, Zbur saw some of his own close friends become ill, motivating him to become an AIDS activist at a time when the federal government was failing to provide resources to the community that needed them the most. 

“Since I’ve been in the Assembly, I’ve always had a number of bills every year that focus on uplifting the LGBTQ community, as well as getting to zero, in terms of HIV — zero transmissions, zero deaths, zero stigma.”

Prior to this bill and a few others, Zbur also introduced AB 5, which he says was a culmination of eight years worth of work, from the time he started working for Equality California (EQCA), the state’s largest nonprofit organization dedicated toward advocating for LGBTQ civil rights.

AB 5, which was passed and is now known as the Safe and Supportive Schools
Act, is meant to improve the conditions for LGBTQ students in schools. 

“I think this bill has the most impact for LGBTQ youth and it’s the one I’m proudest of because it requires that every teacher in California schools has LGBTQ cultural competency training, to make sure that our schools are safe and supportive.”  Zbur, a longtime advocate for the LGBTQ community, has a long history of activism. 

In the early 1980s, Zbur campaigned for the fight against HIV/AIDS, helped found the Children Affected by AIDS Foundation and alongside the Los Angeles LGBT Center, organized fundraisers for Bill Clinton while he was governor of Arkansas, and Barbara Boxer, who was then running for U.S. Senate. 

“I think part of me coming out more publicly was due to the HIV epidemic and
the fact that I had friends that were getting sick,” he said. “I had a long-term boyfriend
back then and we started to get politically active, really trying to make sure that the
government was doing something about the HIV epidemic.”

He says that this is when he decided he was going to get Barbara Boxer elected, because she was the only Senate candidate during that time who was even mentioning the LGBTQ community. 

In 1996, Zbur ran for the United States House of Representatives in California’s 38th congressional district against Republican incumbent Steve Horn. He became the first openly gay non-incumbent congressional primary candidate to win an election when he won the Democratic primary election on March 26, 1996. 

During many years following that win, Zbur jumped into another pool of justice
fighting for environmental issues and then in 2014, joined Equality California as
executive director. Under his leadership, EQCA quadrupled in size, passed groundbreaking legislation to advance LGBTQ equality measures and sued the Trump-Pence administration twice, blocking attacks against the transgender community of California. 

In 2022, Zbur was elected to the California State Assembly to represent the 51st
Assembly District, a position he currently serves. He was appointed in July 2023 by
Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas to serve as the Democratic Caucus Chair of the California Assembly, one of the Speaker’s key leadership positions. During that time, he also led the advancement in civil rights and social justice for the many other marginalized communities within the LGBTQ umbrella, such as communities of color, communities of faith, immigrants women and people living with HIV. 

Zbur says that his work is never over. 

“We’re facing greater risks that are greater than I think we’ve faced in recent
years coming out of the [first] Trump administration. The targeting of transgender and
gender non-conforming people is an even greater part of his hostility toward our
community,” he said. “It’s very real, and we see that it’s not just rhetoric. He’s taking real
steps to try to shut down the healthcare that LGBTQ people and transgender people
need.”

Zbur says that he and the other members of the LGBTQ Caucus in Sacramento
are constantly thinking of those decisions and their repercussions. 

“I have another bill that is focused on helping transgender people get the
government documents they need, so they can protect themselves from the Trump
administration and so that they can travel easily to get medical care.” 

Zbur says that his own coming out story was positive, but he grew up in a time
where he did not know anyone who was out about their identity. He went through many
trials and tribulations to end up in a space where he was finally accepted. 

“For me, coming to terms with the fact that I was LGBTQ, was something that
took a number of years,” said Zbur. “The world was just a very different place back then
and the risks were high, coming out.” 

When he started his career as a lawyer, he became a partner in a law firm called
Latham and Walkins, where there was not a single person who was out. 

“I eventually came out when I was a fourth or fifth year associate and I became
the first out lawyer in the firm’s history, though there were other gay lawyers at the firm.”
Now, at 68, Zbur says that his only regret is that he lived in the closet for too long.

“When I look back at the things I regret, it’s that I lived in the closet for as long as
I did,” he said. “That is a very limiting thing that I think doesn’t allow your soul or your
spirit to flourish.”

Continue Reading

California Politics

Governor Newsom supports bill to put LGBTQ helpline number on student ID’s

AB 727 would put the number for The Trevor Project on the back of students ID cards

Published

on

Gov. Gavin Newsom expressed support for LGBTQ suicide hotline measures for K-12 students in direct response to recent reports that Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy Jr’s., plans to cut funding for the national nonprofit that provides the resource to LGBTQ people.

“Cutting off kids’ access to help is indefensible. While the Trump administration walks away from its responsibility, California will continue to expand access to life-saving resources, because the life of every child — straight, gay, trans — is worth fighting for,” said Gov. Newsom. 

Assembly Bill 727, introduced by Assemblymember Mark González, would aim to facilitate pupil and student safety by requiring schools and institutions to have the telephone number and text line for a specified LGBTQ suicide hotline provided by The Trevor Project, that is available 24 hours per day, 7 days per week. 

Existing law that will be enforced July 1, 2025, requires a public or private school that serves pupils in any of grades 7 to 12, inclusive, and that issues pupil identification cards to have printed on the identification cards the number for the 988 Suicide and Crisis Lifeline. 

This bill would additionally require the list of K-12 public schools and institutions to provide support to youth and their families who have been subjected to school-based discrimination, harassment, intimidation or bullying on the basis of gender identity, sexual orientation or gender expression. 

Conservative organizations like the California Family Council are pushing back on this bill, stating that this bill is “forcing LGBTQ advocacy on every student ID — no exemptions for religious schools,” and saying it “undermines families.” 

A national 2024 survey by The Trevor Project on mental health of LGBTQ young people, reports that 1 in 10 young LGBTQ-indetifying people in the United States attempted suicide in 2023. Over a third of LGBTQ young people seriously considered suicide within the past year and that figure was even higher for trans and nonbinary-identifying youth, with that figure being  46%. 

The survey also found that half of LGBTQ youth who wanted mental health resources and care could not get them. Over 50% of survey respondents answered “a lot” when asked about how often recent politics negatively impact their well-being. 

The Trevor Project is one of the nonprofit organizations that is currently at high-risk for losing their funding under Trump’s budget cuts. 

The phone number to call for help is 1-866-488-7386 and the number to text for help is 678-678, or you can send them a message at the site link.

Continue Reading

Congress

Democratic lawmakers travel to El Salvador, demand information about gay Venezuelan asylum seeker

Congressman Robert Garcia led delegation

Published

on

Andry Hernández Romero (photo credit: Immigrant Defenders Law Center)

California Congressman Robert Garcia on Tuesday said the U.S. Embassy in El Salvador has agreed to ask the Salvadoran government about the well-being of a gay asylum seeker from Venezuela who remains incarcerated in the Central American country.

The Trump-Vance administration last month “forcibly removed” Andry Hernández Romero, a stylist who asked for asylum because of persecution he suffered because of his sexual orientation and political beliefs, and other Venezuelans from the U.S. and sent them to El Salvador.

The White House on Feb. 20 designated Tren de Aragua, a Venezuelan gang, as an “international terrorist organization.” President Donald Trump on March 15 invoked the Alien Enemies Act of 1798, which the Associated Press notes allows the U.S. to deport “noncitizens without any legal recourse.”

Garcia told the Los Angeles Blade that he and three other lawmakers — U.S. Reps. Maxwell Alejandro Frost (D-Fla.), Maxine Dexter (D-Ore.), and Yassamin Ansari (D-Ariz.) — met with U.S. Ambassador to El Salvador William Duncan and embassy staffers in San Salvador, the Salvadoran capital.

“His lawyers haven’t heard from him since he was abducted during his asylum process,” said Garcia.

The gay California Democrat noted the embassy agreed to ask the Salvadoran government to “see how he (Hernández) is doing and to make sure he’s alive.”

“That’s important,” said Garcia. “They’ve agreed to that … we’re hopeful that we get some word, and that will be very comforting to his family and of course to his legal team.”

The U.S. Embassy in El Salvador in 2023. (Photo courtesy of the U.S. Embassy of El Salvador’s Facebook page)

Garcia, Frost, Dexter, and Ansari traveled to El Salvador days after House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chair James Comer (R-Ky.) and House Homeland Security Committee Chair Mark Green (R-Tenn.) denied their request to use committee funds for their trip.

“We went anyways,” said Garcia. “We’re not going to be intimidated by that.”

Salvadoran President Nayib Bukele on April 14 met with Trump at the White House. U.S. Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) three days later sat down with Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a Maryland man who the Trump-Vance administration wrongfully deported to El Salvador on March 15.

Abrego was sent to the country’s Terrorism Confinement Center, a maximum-security prison known by the Spanish acronym CECOT. The Trump-Vance administration continues to defy a U.S. Supreme Court ruling that ordered it to “facilitate” Abrego’s return to the U.S.

Garcia, Frost, Dexter, and Ansari in a letter they sent a letter to Duncan and Secretary of State Marco Rubio on Monday demanded “access to” Hernández, who they note “may be imprisoned at” CECOT. A State Department spokesperson referred the Blade to the Salvadoran government in response to questions about “detainees” in the country.

Garcia said the majority of those in CECOT who the White House deported to El Salvador do not have criminal records.

“They can say what they want, but if they’re not presenting evidence, if a judge isn’t sending people, and these people have their due process, I just don’t understand how we have a country without due process,” he told the Blade. “It’s just the bedrock of our democracy.”

President Donald Trump greets Salvadoran President Nayib Bukele at the White House on April 14, 2025. (Public domain photo)

Garcia said he and Frost, Dexter, and Ansari spoke with embassy staff, Salvadoran journalists and human rights activists and “anyone else who would listen” about Hernández. The California Democrat noted he and his colleagues also highlighted Abrego’s case.

“He (Hernández) was accepted for his asylum claim,” said Garcia. “He (Hernández) signed up for the asylum process on an app that we created for this very purpose, and then you get snatched up and taken to a foreign prison. It is unacceptable and inhumane and cruel and so it’s important that we elevate his story and his case.”

The Blade asked Garcia why the Trump-Vance administration is deporting people to El Salvador without due process.

“I honestly believe that he (Trump) is a master of dehumanizing people, and he wants to continue his horrendous campaign to dehumanize migrants and scare the American public and lie to the American public,” said Garcia.

The State Department spokesperson in response to the Blade’s request for comment referenced spokesperson Tammy Bruce’s comments about Van Hollen’s trip to El Salvador.

“These Congressional representatives would be better off focused on their own districts,” said the spokesperson. “Instead, they are concerned about non-U.S. citizens.”

Continue Reading

Congress

EXCLUSIVE: Garcia demands answers on deportation of gay Venezuelan asylum seeker

Congressman’s correspondence was shared exclusively with the Blade

Published

on

Andry Hernández Romero (photo credit: Immigrant Defenders Law Center)

U.S. Rep. Robert Garcia (D-Calif.) is demanding answers from the Trump-Vance administration on its deportation of Andry Hernández Romero, a gay Venezuelan makeup artist who was sent to a prison in El Salvador in violation of a federal court order and in the absence of credible evidence supporting the government’s claims about his affiliation with a criminal gang.

Copies of letters the congressman issued on Thursday to Immigration and Customs Enforcement and CoreCivic, a private prison contractor, were shared exclusively with the Los Angeles Blade.

Garcia noted that Hernández, who sought asylum from persecution in Venezuela over his sexual orientation and political beliefs, had entered the U.S. legally, passed a preliminary screening, and had no criminal record.

Pro-bono lawyers representing Hernández during his detention in the U.S. pending an outcome in his asylum case were informed that their client had been removed to El Salvador a week after he failed to show for a hearing on March 13.

Hernández’s family now fears for his safety while he remains in El Salvador’s Terrorism Confinement Center (CECOT), which has a well documented record of human rights abuses, Garcia said.

Additionally, the congressman wrote, while experts say Tren de Aragua does not use tattoos as identifiers, the “primary evidence” supporting Hernández’s deportation based on his supposed links to the transnational Venezuelan gang “appears to have been two crown tattoos labeled ‘Mom’ and ‘Dad,’ which are common cultural symbols in his hometown.”

The determination about his links to or membership in the organization was made by a CoreCivic employee whose criminal record and misconduct as a law enforcement officer led to his termination from the Milwaukee Police Department, Garcia wrote in his letter to the company.

Requesting a response by May 1, the congressman asked CoreCivic President Damon T. Hininger to address the following questions:

  • What qualifications and training does CoreCivic require for employees tasked with making determinations about detainees’ affiliations?
  • What protocols are in place to ensure that determinations of gang affiliation are based on credible and corroborated evidence?
  • How does CoreCivic oversee and review the decisions made by its employees in such critical matters?
  • What mechanisms exist to prevent and address potential misconduct?
  • What is the nature of CoreCivic’s collaboration with ICE in making determinations that affect deportation decisions? Are there joint review processes?
  • What background checks and ongoing assessments are conducted for employees involved in detainee evaluations, particularly those with prior law enforcement experience?
  • What guidelines does CoreCivic follow regarding the use of tattoos as indicators of gang affiliation, and how does the company ensure that cultural or personal tattoos are not misinterpreted?

In his letter to Tae D. Johnson, acting director of ICE, Garcia requested answers to the following questions by May 1:

  • Did ICE personnel independently review and approve the determination made by CoreCivic employee Charles Cross Jr. identifying Mr. Hernández Romero as a member of the Tren de Aragua gang?
  • What evidence, beyond Mr. Hernández Romero’s tattoos, was used to substantiate the claim of gang affiliation?
  • Under what legal authority are private contractors like CoreCivic permitted to make determinations that directly impact deportation decisions?
  • What vetting processes and background checks are in place for contractors involved in such determinations? Are there oversight mechanisms to ensure their credibility and adherence to due process?
  • What guidelines does ICE follow regarding the use of tattoos as indicators of gang affiliation, and how does the company ensure that cultural or personal tattoos are not misinterpreted?

Together with U.S. Rep. Maxwell Frost (D-Fla.), Garcia wrote to U.S. Rep. James Comer (R-Ky.) on Tuesday requesting permission to bring a congressional delegation to CECOT for purposes of conducting a welfare check on detainees, expressing specific concern for Hernández’s wellbeing. The congressmen said they would “gladly include any Republican Members of the committee who wish to participate.” 

Hernández’s case has drawn fierce criticism of the Trump-Vance administration along with calls for his return to the U.S.

Influential podcaster and Trump ally Joe Rogan spoke out in late March, calling the deportation “horrific” and “a horrible mistake.”

Last week, California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) sent a letter to Kristi Noem, secretary of the U.S. Homeland Security, which manages ICE, demanding Hernández’s immediate return and raising concerns with the right to due process amid the administration’s crackdown on illegal immigration.

Hernández “was denied the opportunity to defend himself against unsubstantiated allegations of gang involvement or to present his asylum claim,” the governor wrote. “We are not a nation that sends people to be tortured and victimized in a foreign prison for public relations victories.”

Immigrant Defenders Law Center President Lindsay Toczylowski, who is representing Hernández, has not been able to reach her client since his removal from the U.S., she told NBC News San Diego in a report published April 11.

“Under the Constitution, every single person has a right to due process, and that means they have a right to notification of any allegations the government is making against them and a right to go into court and prove that those allegations are wrong if that’s the case,” she said. “In Andry’s case, the government never gave us that opportunity. In fact, they didn’t even bring him to court, and they have forcefully sent him to El Salvador without ever giving us any notice or without telling us the way that we could appeal their decision.”

“CECOT, this prison where no one has ever left, where people are held incommunicado, is a very dangerous place for someone like Andry,” Toczylowski said.

In March, a DHS spokesperson posted on X that Hernández’s “own social media indicates he is a member of Tren de Aragua,” though they did not point to any specific posts and NBC reported that reviews of his known social media accounts turned up no evidence of gang activity.  

During a visit to CECOT in March, Time Magazine photographer Philip Holsinger photographed Romero and reported that the detainee plead his innocence — “I’m not a gang member. I’m gay. I’m a stylist.” — crying for his mother as he was slapped and his head was shaved.

Continue Reading

Federal Government

USCIS announces it now only recognizes ‘two biological sexes’

Immigration agency announced it has implemented Trump executive order

Published

on

An American flag flies in front of a privately-run U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement detention center in the Southeast U.S. on July 31, 2020. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services has announced it now only recognizes "two biological genders, male and female." (Washington Blade photo by Yariel Valdés González)

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services on Wednesday announced it now only “recognizes two biological sexes, male and female.”

A press release notes this change to its policies is “consistent with” the “Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government” executive order that President Donald Trump signed shortly after he took office for the second time on Jan. 20.

“There are only two sexes — male and female,” said DHS spokesperson Tricia McLaughlin in a statement. “President Trump promised the American people a revolution of common sense, and that includes making sure that the policy of the U.S. government agrees with simple biological reality.”

“Proper management of our immigration system is a matter of national security, not a place to promote and coddle an ideology that permanently harms children and robs real women of their dignity, safety, and well-being,” she added.

The press release notes USCIS “considers a person’s sex as that which is generally evidenced on the birth certificate issued at or nearest to the time of birth.”

“If the birth certificate issued at or nearest to the time of birth indicates a sex other than male or female, USCIS will base the determination of sex on secondary evidence,” it reads.

The USCIS Policy Manuel defines “secondary evidence” as “evidence that may demonstrate a fact is more likely than not true, but the evidence does not derive from a primary, authoritative source.”

“Records maintained by religious or faith-based organizations showing that a person was divorced at a certain time are an example of secondary evidence of the divorce,” it says.

USCIS in its press release notes it “will not deny benefits solely because the benefit requestor did not properly indicate his or her sex.”

“This is a cruel and unnecessary policy that puts transgender, nonbinary, and intersex immigrants in danger,” said Immigration Equality Law and Policy Director Bridget Crawford on Wednesday. “The U.S. government is now forcing people to carry identity documents that do not reflect who they are, opening them up to increased discrimination, harassment, and violence. This policy does not just impact individuals — it affects their ability to travel, work, access healthcare, and live their lives authentically.”  

“By denying trans people the right to self-select their gender, the government is making it harder for them to exist safely and with dignity,” added Crawford. “This is not about ‘common sense’—it is about erasing an entire community from the legal landscape. Transgender, nonbinary, and intersex people have always existed, and they deserve to have their identities fully recognized and respected. We will continue to fight for the rights of our clients and for the reversal of this discriminatory policy.” 

Continue Reading

Politics

City of Long Beach passes motion to become LGBTQ sanctuary city

The motion also officially recognizes Trans Day of Visibility on March 31st

Published

on

Canva design by Gisselle Palomera

Long Beach City Council passes motion to officially recognize March 31st as Transgender Day of Visibility and make Long Beach a sanctuary city for LGBTQ+ people, with all 8 councilmembers in favor. 

At Tuesday’s City Council meeting, community members weighed in on the motion through public comment. 

“The City of Long Beach is 1 of only 47 cities nationally that have gotten a perfect score on a Human Rights Campaign’s Municipal Equality Index,” said community member Anthony Brice at the public meeting.  “It also received an extra 11 bonus points, so we are urging the city to please adopt this motion and uphold those standards.” 

In March, Councilmember Megan Kerr, Councilmember Cindy Allen and Vice Mayor Roberto Uranga submitted a recommendation to Mayor Rex Richardson and the City Council to officially recognize March 31st as Transgender Day of Visibility in the City of Long Beach and recognize the City of Long Beach as a ‘Transgender Safe City.’

During the public comment section of the meeting, other community members also voiced their opinion and opposition to Elon Musk bringing SpaceX to Long Beach, citing his openly anti-trans and anti-LGBTQ agenda. 

Janine Stallings, a trans community member, urged the city council to not just pass this “performative resolution,” but to also cancel all current contracts with SpaceX and any future plans for contracts. 

According to the motion’s recommendation, “the current administration’s policies have raised concerns about the rights and protections of transgender, non-binary, and gender diverse individuals.” 

The recommendation goes on to say that Long Beach has long been a hub for LGBTQ+ culture, activism and community, citing the Broadway Corridor as a cornerstone of the community for decades. The corridor is home to numerous LGBTQ+ businesses, gathering spaces and historic advocacy efforts, representing the city’s commitment to diversity and inclusion. 

The recommendation – now an approved motion – called for Mayor Richardson to approve the recognition of March 31st as TDOV and make LBC a sanctuary city because it is essential to preserve the safe spaces that already exist. 

“I am proud that our city remains an inclusive [city] and a safe place for everyone, especially our transgender community who, like many of you just talked about, face a heightened amount of criticism,” said Councilmember Allen. “It’s just been horrible – everything that’s been happening during this current administration.” 

The city already has other policies in place regarding LGBTQ+ culture and identity such as, raising the Progress Pride Flag and the Transgender Pride Flag at City Hall, collecting sexual orientation and gender identity data to identify and address disparities within the community. 

According to the recommendation, “under the current administration, it is more important than ever to unite and advocate for the protection of equal rights and legal protections for all.”

Continue Reading

Congress

Republican lawmakers demand IOC ban transgender athletes from women’s events

2028 Summer Olympics to take place in Los Angeles

Published

on

U.S. Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-Colo.) is among the Republican lawmakers who have demanded the International Olympic Committee ban transgender athletes from women's events. (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

A group of Republican lawmakers have demanded the International Olympic Committee ban transgender athletes from women’s athletic competitions.

The lawmakers — U.S. Sens. Jim Risch (R-Idaho), Mike Crapo (R-Idaho), Jim Banks (R-Ind.), Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.), Steve Daines (R-Mont.), Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), Josh Hawley (R-Mo.), Jim Justice (R-W.Va.), James Lankford (R-Okla.), Tim Sheehy (R-Mont.), and Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.) and U.S. Reps. Burgess Owens (R-Utah), Lauren Boebert (R-Colo.), Vern Buchanan (R-Fla.), Tim Burchett (R-Tenn.), Dan Crenshaw (R-Texas), Brad Finstad (R-Minn.), Craig Goldman (R-Texas), Mark Green (R-Tenn.), Ashley Hinson (R-Iowa), Mike Kennedy (R-Utah), Nick LaLota (R-N.Y.), Blake Moore (R-Utah), Riley Moore (R-W.Va.), Austin Pfluger (R-Texas), John Rose (R-Tenn.), and Claudia Tenney (R-N.Y.) — made the demand in a letter they sent to IOC President Thomas Bach on Tuesday.

“In the United States, we honor our female Olympians. These athletes, and so many others, have inspired generations of young women around the world to compete and excel. Their legacy underscores the vital importance of fairness in women’s sports at every level of competition,” reads the letter. “Future Olympians are counting on the IOC to protect the opportunities of women and girls to contribute to this proud tradition.”

“To do so, the IOC must base eligibility for women’s athletic competitions on biological sex,” it adds. “Allowing biological males to compete in women’s categories undermines competitive opportunities, safety, and respect for female athletes.”

The IOC in 2021 adopted its “Framework on Fairness, Inclusion and Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Gender Identity and Sex Variations” that includes the following provisions:

• 3.1 Eligibility criteria should be established and implemented fairly and in a manner that does not systematically exclude athletes from competition based upon their gender identity, physical appearance and/or sex variations.

• 3.2 Provided they meet eligibility criteria that are consistent with principle 4 (“Fairness”, athletes should be allowed to compete in the category that best aligns with their self-determined gender identity.

• 3.3 Criteria to determine disproportionate competitive advantage may, at times, require testing of an athlete’s performance and physical capacity. However, no athlete should be subject to targeted testing because of, or aimed at determining, their sex, gender identity and/or sex variations.

The 2028 Summer Olympics will take place in Los Angeles.

President Donald Trump on Feb. 5 issued an executive order that bans trans women and girls from female sports teams in the U.S. The Human Rights Campaign and other advocacy groups criticized Democratic California Gov. Gavin Newsom last week after he said it is “deeply unfair” to allow trans athletes to compete in women’s sports.

The Guardian on Feb. 25 reported the State Department has ordered consular officials “to deny visas to transgender athletes attempting to come to the U.S. for sports competitions, and to issue permanent visa bans against those who are deemed to misrepresent their birth sex on visa applications.” A travel advisory for trans and nonbinary people who are planning to visit the U.S. that the German government issued last week specifically notes the Trump-Vance administration has banned the State Department from issuing passports with “X” gender markers.

The letter notes Trump’s Feb. 5 executive order, and indicates the signatories “stand united with Secretary of State Marco Rubio and President Trump in calling on the IOC to amend its standards and safeguard the opportunities of female athletes on the Olympic stage.”

“We urge you to reaffirm the IOC’s commitment to upholding the integrity of women’s Olympic competitions and ensure that only biological women and girls are allowed to compete in female sports categories,” reads the letter. “The Olympic Games should be a model for integrity in sports, and the next IOC president must firmly defend the rights of dedicated female athletes.”

The Los Angeles Blade has reached out to the IOC for comment.

Continue Reading

National

Trump hails anti-trans policies in partisan speech before joint session of Congress

GLAAD: ‘a baseless and unhinged disinformation campaign’

Published

on

President Donald Trump speaks at a joint session of Congress on March 4, 2025. (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

President Donald Trump delivered a divisive and partisan address before a joint session of Congress on Tuesday that also included multiple references to his administration’s anti-transgender executive actions.

“We’ve ended the tyranny of so-called diversity, equity, and inclusion policies all across the entire federal government and indeed the private sector and our military,” Trump said, promising, “our country will be woke no longer.”

Later, he said “We have removed the poison of critical race theory from our public schools, and they signed an order making it the official policy of the United States government that there are only two genders, male and female.”

“I also signed an executive order to ban men from playing in women’s sports,” Trump said.

At that point, the president introduced one of his special guests, Payton McNabb—who, he said, was seriously injured three years ago when her girls’ volleyball game was “invaded by a male” who spiked the ball “so hard in Peyton’s face, causing traumatic brain injury.”

GLAAD, in a press release before Trump’s speech, noted that “McNabb has since been hired by opponents of trans people to use her injury to argue that all trans youth should be denied the chance to play sports as their authentic selves.”

She is “a paid spokesperson for an anti-transgender group that also advocates to ban health care and to force schools to dangerously out LGBTQ youth without their consent,” the group wrote.

Trump continued, “Take a look at what happened in the women’s boxing, weight lifting, track and field, swimming, or cycling, where a male recently finished a long distance race five hours and 14 minutes ahead of a woman for a new record by five hours.”

“It’s demeaning for women, and it’s very bad for our country. We’re not going to put up with it any longer.”

During this section of the speech, news cameras turned to Riley Gaines, a former NCAA swimmer turned anti-trans activist, who was a guest of Republican U.S. Rep. Mariannette Miller-Meeks (Iowa) and has worked with the same group as McNabb.

GLAAD wrote that Gaines “parlayed her fifth place finish into a career of testifying in states she does not live in to support full bans on transgender youth as young as kindergarten from playing sports.”

Later, when decrying government spending, Trump noted $8 million was used “to promote LGBTQI+ in the African nation of Lesotho, which nobody has ever heard of” and $8 million “for making mice transgender.”

About an hour into his speech, the president said, “My administration is also working to protect our children from toxic ideologies in our schools. A few years ago, January Littlejohn and her husband discovered that their daughter’s school had secretly socially transitioned their 13 year old little girl.”

“Teachers and administrators conspired to deceive January and her husband while encouraging their daughter to use a new name and pronouns,” he said. “‘They-them’ pronoun, actually, all without telling January, who is here tonight and is now a courageous advocate against this form of child abuse.”

GLAAD notes that “records show January Littlejohn of Tallahassee, Fla., worked with the school district to support her nonbinary child, before Littlejohn sued the district with lawyers from a national anti-LGBTQ+ group.”

According to GLAAD, the family’s complaint accused school of discussing “restrooms and name change requests with their child without their consent” but “a public records request showed that the family had ongoing communications with the school and gave approval to let their child and their teachers lead on appropriate school protocols.” 

“The Trump White House is using the address to Congress to continue its baseless and unhinged disinformation campaign against transgender Americans,” GLAAD said. “The invited guests being deployed to smear transgender people are paid spokespeople for anti-LGBTQ groups that demand schools dangerously out LGBTQ students without their consent, who go against every major medical association supporting medically-necessary health care, and do nothing to promote women and girls in sports or protect everyone’s safety and wellbeing.” 

Continue Reading

Congress

Garcia vows not to be silenced amid U.S. Attorney’s inquiry into his criticism of Musk

Congressman received a letter from the U.S. attorney’s office in D.C.

Published

on

U.S. Rep. Robert Garcia (D-Calif.) (YouTube/MSNBC screen capture)

U.S. Rep. Robert Garcia (D-Calif.) is pushing back after President Donald Trump’s interim U.S. attorney for D.C., Ed Martin, disclosed his office’s inquiry into whether the congressman’s remarks about Elon Musk earlier this month constituted a threat against a public official.

“This is completely ridiculous, to essentially threaten me with possible prosecution [and] investigations through the U.S. Department of Justice because I used a metaphor to criticize Elon Musk,” Garcia told The Bulwark’s Tim Miller during an interview on Feb. 20.

At issue is a Feb. 12 appearance on CNN during which, as Martin said in a letter to the congressman’s office, “When asked how Democrats can stop Elon Musk, you spoke clearly: ‘What the American public wants is for us to bring actual weapons to this bar fight. This is an actual fight for democracy.’”

He continued, “This sounds to some like a threat to Mr. Musk—an appointed representative of President Donald Trump who you call a ‘dick’—and government staff who work for him. Their concerns have led to this inquiry.”

Garcia’s comments came just after he participated in the first House subcommittee hearing on Musk’s DOGE, the Department of Government Efficiency, which was established by an executive order issued on the first day Trump took office.

In a statement to the Los Angeles Blade, House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries (N.Y.) said “Rep. Robert Garcia is a thoughtful, hardworking, and law-abiding legislator who serves his constituents and the nation with distinction. House Democrats will not be intimidated by far-right extremists who are determined to weaponize the criminal justice system against Congress.”

Garcia serves on the powerful House Oversight Committee as well as in the Congressional Equality Caucus, as one of its 11 LGBTQ+ co-chairs. In November, he was elected the Democratic Caucus Leadership Representative.

“I’ve talked to a lot of folks, members of the House and others, who have been very supportive.” he said on Feb. 20. “I said, ‘Look, we can’t allow this singling out of me. It’s not really about me, right? This is about silencing critics and critics in Congress.’”

Later in the interview, he added “we’re talking to the appropriate folks, and of course, talking to folks in the Democratic leadership” who understand the broader stakes in terms of “our job” as House Democrats to “be the loyal opposition.”

U.S. Rep. Gerald Connolly (Va.), the Oversight Committee’s top Democrat, also issued a statement condemning Martin’s letter:

“This is a shameful attempt to silence and stifle congressional oversight. Mr. Martin—an organizer, financier, and legal representative for the January 6th insurrection—is weaponizing the Justice Department to carry out the president’s retribution tour.

“This ‘Operation Whirlwind’ is a smokescreen meant to distract from the true intentions of the Trump administration: Silencing criticism and snuffing out any attempt to exercise oversight of their misdeeds and perversion of the law. I can assure you that Congressman Garcia and our fellow Oversight Democrats will not be deterred by these threats, and we will continue to fight to safeguard our democracy and protect the rights of the American people we serve.”

Martin on Feb. 19 announced “Operation Whirlwind,” a new initiative to prosecute threats against public officials at all levels of government, which some critics and legal experts believe is primarily intended as a means of silencing criticism.

In addition to Garcia, Martin has sent letters to the Senate’s Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer (N.Y.) on Jan. 21, Feb. 3, and Feb. 11, indicating plans to review remarks he made in 2020 to see if they constituted unlawful threats against two of Trump’s U.S. Supreme Court nominees, Brett Kavanaugh and Neil Gorsuch.

“I want to tell you, Gorsuch,” Schumer said, “I want to tell you, Kavanaugh—you have released the whirlwind and you will pay the price. You won’t know what hit you if you go forward with these awful decisions.” 

The top Senate Democrat was speaking during a rally about the conservative jurists’ potential revocation of decades-old constitutional protections for abortion, which they ultimately did in 2022 with their 5-4 decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization.

As detailed by aide to the senator in his response to Martin, “on March 5, 2020, the day after the comments referenced in your letter, Senator Schumer made the following remarks” from the Senate floor:

“Now, I should not have used the words I used yesterday. They didn’t come out the way I intended to. My point was that there would be political consequences—political consequences—for President Trump and Senate Republicans if the Supreme Court, with the newly confirmed Justices, stripped away a woman’s right to choose.

“Of course, I didn’t intend to suggest anything other than political and public opinion consequences for the Supreme Court, and it is a gross distortion to imply otherwise. I am from Brooklyn. We speak in strong language.

“I shouldn’t have used the words I did, but in no way was I making a threat. I never—never—would do such a thing. Leader McConnell knows that, and Republicans who are busy manufacturing outrage over these comments know that too.”

The aide concluded, “As Senator Schumer’s statement on the Senate floor confirmed, the comments were not a threat to physically harm any person. I hope that this clarifying information is helpful.”

Shortly after Trump’s appointment of Martin, the conservative lawyer and activist dismissed pending cases against rioters who sacked the Capitol building on Jan. 6, 2021, fired the prosecutors who were involved, and began investigations into those who brought obstruction charges that were ultimately invalidated by a U.S. Supreme Court decision in June.

Barbara McQuade, a former federal prosecutor who teaches law at the University of Michigan and serves as a legal analyst for NBC News and MSNBC, told the Washington Post she had “never seen anything like these letters from a U.S. attorney,” who would typically assign agents to lead such a probe while abiding the Justice Department’s policy of not confirming or denying the existence of any investigation.

“It seems like a fair inference that these letters are designed more to chill free speech than to seek clarification, as they purport to do,” McQuade added.

Garcia agreed, telling Miller that the effort “could have a chilling effect on other folks that actually want to come out and criticize and oppose” Trump, Musk, the administration, or their allies.

Looking ahead, Martin has “given me, by the way, till Tuesday to respond to this letter,” Garcia noted. When asked about what he planned to do, the congressman said “we’re having some conversations about that” but “what we’re not going to do is stay silent.”

“The lesson here is not to retreat,” he said. “The lesson here is to push harder and continue to let people know they are literally trying to limit free speech.”

Discussing his remarks about Musk during an appearance on CNN on Feb. 20, Garcia said “what’s really critical at this moment, I think, for all of us to understand, is that we should be allowed to speak freely, and we certainly should be allowed to use figures of speech, and anyone that watches that can see that as a figure of speech or a metaphor in the way we’re describing this fight.”

The congressman added, “And it is a fight. This is a fight for democracy.”

Continue Reading

Popular