As Congress finalizes its funding for fiscal year 2027, Republicans are attempting to include five anti-LGBTQ+ riders in the National Security and Department of State Appropriations Act.

A rider is an unrelated provision tacked onto a bill that must pass — in this instance, the bill provides funding for national security policy and for the State Department.

The riders range from restricting Pride flags in federal buildings to banning transgender healthcare, but all aim to limit the visibility and rights of LGBTQ+ Americans.

The five riders are:

Section 7067(a) prohibits Pride flags from being flown over federal buildings.

Section 7067(c) restricts the United States’ ability to appoint special envoys, representatives, or coordinators unless expressly authorized by Congress. These roles have historically been used to promote U.S. interests in international forums — including advancing human and LGBTQ+ and intersex rights and other policy priorities. The change would halt what the Congressional Equality Caucus describes as providing “critical expertise to U.S. foreign policy and leadership abroad.”

Section 7067(d) reinforces multiple anti-equality executive orders signed by President Donald Trump, effectively requiring that foreign assistance funded by the United States comply with those orders. This includes rescinding federal contractor nondiscrimination protections, including for LGBTQ+ people.

Section 7067(e) prohibits funding for any organization that provides or promotes medically necessary healthcare for trans people or “promotes transgenderism” — effectively banning funds for organizations that recognize trans people exist. This is despite the practice of gender-affirming care being supported by nearly every major medical association.

Section 7067(g) reinforces two global gag rules put forward by the Trump-Vance administration. One is the Trans Global Gag Rule, which prohibits foreign assistance funding for organizations that acknowledge the existence of trans people or advocate for nondiscrimination protections for them, among other activities. The second is the DEI Global Gag Rule, which prohibits foreign assistance funding for organizations that engage in efforts to address the ongoing effects of racism, sexism, and other forms of bigotry outside the United States.

The global gag rule has its roots in anti-abortion policy introduced by President Ronald Reagan in 1984, when the 40th president barred foreign organizations receiving U.S. global health assistance from providing information, referrals, or services for legal abortion, or from advocating for access to abortion services in their own countries. Planned Parenthood notes that the policy also affects programs beyond abortion, including efforts to expand access to contraception, prevent and treat HIV/AIDS, combat malaria, and improve maternal and child health.

If organizations funded by the State Department engage in these activities, they could lose funding.

This anti-LGBTQ+ push aligns with broader actions from the Trump-Vance administration since the start of Trump’s second term, which have focused on restricting human rights — particularly those of trans Americans.

The House Appropriations Committee is responsible for drafting the appropriations legislation. U.S. Rep. Tom Cole (R-Okla.) serves as chair, with U.S. Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.) as ranking member. The committee includes 34 Republicans and 27 Democrats.

For FY27 appropriations, Congress is supposed to pass and have the president sign the funding bills by Sept. 30, 2026.

Lawmakers on Wednesday introduced a bill that would block the expansion of the global gag rule.

President Ronald Reagan in 1985 implemented the global gag rule, also known as the “Mexico City” policy, which bans U.S. foreign aid for groups that support abortion and/or offer abortion-related services.

Trump reinstated the rule during his first administration. The Biden-Harris administration shortly after it took office in 2021 rescinded it.

The Trump-Vance administration earlier this year expanded the global gag rule to ban U.S. foreign aid for groups that promote “gender ideology.” The expansion took effect on Feb. 26.

U.S. Sens. Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.) and Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.) introduced the Protecting Human Rights and Public Health in Foreign Assistance Act in the U.S. Senate. U.S. Reps. Grace Meng (D-N.Y.), Lois Frankel (D-Fla.), Diana DeGette (D-Colo.), Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), Sara Jacobs (D-Calif.), and Gregory Meeks (D-N.Y.) introduced it in the U.S. House of Representatives.

“Using taxpayer money to export the Trump administration’s anti-trans, anti-science, and anti-abortion ideological agenda isn’t just immoral — it’s antithetical to efficient, effective, and rights-based foreign assistance,” said Council for Global Equality Senior Policy Fellow Beirne Roose-Snyder on Wednesday in a press release.

Meng added the Trump-Vance administration’s “crusade against healthcare and global aid is putting millions of lives at risk worldwide.” 

“No one will flourish under the new expanded global gag rule,” said the New York Democrat. “These policies weaponize foreign aid and will result in greater harm, particularly for women and girls, marginalized communities, and LGBTQI+ individuals.”

“They should never have been implemented at all, let alone without even a basic public comment process,” she added. “This legislation will reverse these dangerous policies.”

Republicans have been gaining ground in reshaping education policy to be less inclusive toward LGBTQ+ students at the state level, and now they are turning their focus to Capitol Hill.

Some GOP lawmakers are pushing for a nationwide “Don’t Say Gay” bill, doubling down on their commitment to being the party of “traditional family values” by excluding anyone who does not identify with their sex at birth.

The largest anti-LGBTQ+ education legislation to reach the House chamber is House Bill 2616 — the Parental Rights Over the Education and Care of Their Kids Act, or the PROTECT Kids Act. The PROTECT Kids Act, proposed by U.S. Rep. Tim Walberg (R-Mich.), and co-sponsored by U.S. Reps. Burgess Owens (R-Utah), Mary Miller (R-Ill.), Robert Onder (R-Mo.), and Kevin Kiley (R-Calif.), would require any public elementary and middle schools that receive federal funding to require parental consent to change a child’s gender expression in school.

The bill, which was discussed during Tuesday’s House Rules Committee hearing, would specifically require any schools that get federal money from the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 — which was created to minimize financial discrepancies in education for low-income students — to get parental approval before identifying any child’s gender identity as anything other than what was provided to the school initially. This includes getting approval before allowing children to use their preferred locker room or bathroom.

It reads that any school receiving this funding “shall obtain parental consent before changing a covered student’s (1) gender markers, pronouns, or preferred name on any school form; or (2) sex-based accommodations, including locker rooms or bathrooms.”

LGBTQ+ rights advocates have criticized both national and state efforts to require parental permission to use a child’s preferred gender identity, as it raises issues of at-home safety — especially if the home is not LGBTQ+-affirming — and could lead to the outing of transgender or gender-curious students.

A follow-up bill, HB 2617, proposed by Owens, one of the bill’s co-sponsors, prevents the use of federal funding to “advance concepts related to gender ideology,” using the definition from President Donald Trump’s 2025 Executive Order 14168, making that an enshrined definition in law of sex rather than just by executive order. There is also a bill making its way through the senate with the same text— Senate Bill 2251.

Advocates have also criticized this follow-up legislation, as it would restrict school staff — including teachers and counselors — from acknowledging trans students’ identities or providing any support. They have said that this kind of isolation can worsen mental health outcomes for LGBTQ+ youth and allows for education to be politicized rather than being based in reality.

David Stacy, the Human Rights Campaign’s vice president of government affairs, called this legislation out for using LGBTQ+ children as political pawns in an ideology fight — one that could greatly harm the safety of these children if passed.

“Trans kids are not a political agenda — they are students who deserve safety and affirmation at school like anyone else,” Stacy said in a statement. “Despite the many pressing issues facing our nation, House Republicans continue their bizarre obsession with trans people. H.R. 2616 does not protect children. It targets them. This bill is cruel, and we’re prepared to fight it.”

This is similar to Florida House Bills 1557 and 1069, referred to as the “Don’t Say Gay” bill and “Don’t Say They” bill, respectively, restricting classroom discussions on sexual orientation and gender identity, prohibiting the use of pronouns consistent with one’s gender identity, expanding book banning procedures, and censoring health curriculum.

The American Civil Liberties Union is tracking 233 bills related to restricting student and educator rights in the U.S.

It started as any White House Correspondents’ Dinner is supposed to go—I assume. I’ve never been to one before this, but based on other events I’ve attended at the Hilton, including an HRC gala, it all seemed fairly normal.

There was a lot of traffic. Police had blocked off streets encompassing a large portion of Adams Morgan—particularly around the hotel. The president was making his first appearance after boycotting the event during his first term, so there was a sense of anticipation. It took me about 45 minutes to go just under a mile from my apartment to about three blocks from the hotel in my Uber. I waited until the last possible second before I felt like I was going to be late—6:30—to get out of the car, because it was raining and I was wearing my green tux.

I walked up to a group of people checking tickets at the base of the hotel. They seemed to just be glancing at the tiny, index-card-sized tickets rather than conducting any kind of full security screening outside. As I walked from that first checkpoint to the drive-around drop-off area, I joined what was essentially one long line for the red carpet. It eventually split into people who wanted photos and those who didn’t—but again, there was no real need to show anything beyond that small ticket upon entering, and even that wasn’t being checked closely.

 A light went off in my head; I felt that, given the speed at which security was checking tickets, they couldn’t fully see the foil logo and tiny table numbers from that distance. I remember thinking that if I had a similarly sized piece of paper, I could have gotten through up to that point.

I also noticed there was no real security checkpoint or metal detectors upon initially entering the hotel grounds—unlike what I had seen at the HRC gala the year before.

I waited about 35 minutes in line in the car drop-off area—without cars, since it had been repurposed to corral press and their guests before entering the building and heading onto the red carpet. I took my photo, then went up the escalator to meet my date, Jacob Bernard from Democracy Forward. They wouldn’t let him onto the red carpet without his ticket, so I gave him his, which I had been holding. He was already inside the venue despite not having his ticket on him and had been at one of the pre-parties. 

That also struck me as odd—that you could access a pre-dinner party without a ticket or going through any visible security.

After I found him, we took a photo together at a step-and-repeat past the main red carpet area around 7:45. Oddly enough, a group of my friends—gays who I regularly see on the dance floors of the gay bars of Washington, who work in various government and media-adjacent fields—found me, and we took pictures together. None were White House correspondents or held a “hard pass” to the White House (security credentials that allow entry into the White House complex).

 Another light went off in my head that indicated party crashers probably shouldn’t be getting inside to an event that is supposed to be one of the most secure rooms in the country.

After the photos, I could see groups of people being moved from pre-party spaces in various meeting rooms on other floors and directed toward the main floor where the red carpet had been.

My guest and I went back up to the main floor and walked through a small security checkpoint that included only a handful of metal detectors. From there, I went down the stairs from the lobby into the International Ballroom, where we took our seats at Table 200. I talked to a few people I knew—very traditional pre-event chit-chat. The vibes felt good. It was my first time attending, and I was genuinely excited.

Around 8:15, the Marine Corps Band played and “Commandant’s Four” color guard presented the flags. We were then told to take our seats. 

They introduced the head table—the president, first lady, vice president, and members of the White House Correspondents’ Association board. Weijia Jiang, senior White House correspondent for CBS News and president of the WHCA, gave a brief speech, essentially saying we would eat first and then move into the main program, which was supposed to feature mentalist Oz Pearlman.

At this point my table, 200 which included members of the Wall Street Journal, the Blade, and a European outlet all started eating. About 15 minutes later, Washington Hilton staff began clearing plates and preparing to bring out the next course.

As they cleared the plates, I heard four loud bangs.

I saw hotel employees immediately start ducking. They seemed to understand the gravity of the situation much faster than most attendees, including myself. At first, it sounded like a tray might have fallen over (but I later found out that wasn’t the case).

After about 30 seconds of watching some people duck, others look around in confusion, and some continue eating and drinking, I got down. I kneeled with my chair in front of me as a kind of barrier. Being at Table 200, I felt somewhat removed from where the actual incident occurred.

Then I saw the president being whisked away quickly by Secret Service, along with the first lady and others at the head table.

My reporter instincts kicked in. I grabbed my phone and started filming. I saw SWAT team members rush into the ballroom and onto the stage, clearing the area. I captured a video of people looking around, confused about what had just happened.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Joe Reberkenny (@reberkennyreports)

A few minutes later, the room was told by the WHCA president to hold on—that they would provide more information and guidance on what would happen next. There was some indication that they might try to continue the event despite what had occurred.

Everyone started frantically checking X to see if any major outlets were reporting. I was receiving texts from family, friends, and colleagues about the rapidly unfolding situation.

I walked to the bathroom—twice, technically. I couldn’t find it initially because it was hidden behind black curtains. (Later, those curtains were removed, and the men’s room was in clearer view.)

During the first walk to the bathroom, I called my editor to tell him what was happening. He instructed me to start sending copy to another editor, who would get it online. The ballroom had almost no service—it’s in the basement of a 12-story hotel—so it was a challenge. I utilized SMS fallback (since iMessage wasn’t working) to send updates.

I returned to the table, where people were still hovering—calling editors, scrolling, texting, sending photos and copy. I was already drafting my story and sending it in chunks, adding details as I gathered more information.

I walked my guest toward the bathroom again, which was on the opposite side of the ballroom from our table, so I had to cross what felt like a sea of journalists, PR officials, guests, and others on their phones, talking and scrolling. My guest pointed out that the press pool was being held in an alcove away from the ballroom doors and escalator exit—not in the ballroom with everyone else.

“Alive” by the Bee Gees was playing over the speakers in the bathroom, which felt a little too on the nose.

On my way out, I heard someone speaking over a microphone and rushed to the ballroom entrance. WHCA President Weijia Jiang was speaking. She announced that the event was over and the space was being evacuated.

She also said that President Trump would hold a press conference at the White House in about 25 minutes.

That’s when I knew it was a race against the clock.

I called my editor a second time to update him and asked if I should head to the briefing (knowing the answer would be yes). He confirmed.

Then the crowd began to move. People grabbed purses, bottles—some left belongings behind. Even though it was technically becoming a crime scene, no one was actively forcing us out. It felt more like a collective understanding: It was time to go.

I texted my guest: “OK, I have to go to the White House. I’m so sorry to leave you.”

I made my way with the sea of people toward the one exit we were allowed to use and zipped between women in fancy gowns and men looking like penguins.

I put on my hard press pass, opened the Capital Bikeshare app, reserved the closest e-bike, and headed out. 

I walked up Columbia Road to 20th and Wyoming, grabbed the bike, and rode down Wyoming, then 18th, cut over to U Street, and went straight down 16th to the White House. That ride was exhilarating. I also filmed an Instagram Reel updating my followers on what was going on. I could see tourists and D.C. residents alike looking at me from their cars and the sidewalk, obviously confused as to why a man dressed in a tux had hopped on a bike.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Joe Reberkenny (@reberkennyreports)

I got off the bike where 16th Street meets Lafayette Square and darted toward the first White House security checkpoint, where they were verifying press credentials. Luckily, I had mine. After that, it turned into a mad dash. Everyone who made it through started moving quickly.

The sound of heels on what I think was cobblestone—or maybe brick—sticks with me. My own shoes were clacking as I ran toward the White House alongside other journalists in heels and dress shoes.

At the Secret Service checkpoint, there was a separate line for hard pass holders. Having my hard pass let me skip much of the impeccably dressed line of journalists who didn’t think to bring their hard pass with them.

It was probably the most exquisitely dressed press crowd I’ve ever seen—tuxedos, gowns, full makeup. It felt like something out of “The Hunger Games.”

I went through security, put my belongings through the metal detector, entered my code, grabbed my things, and ran to the briefing room.

The State Department on April 20 announced employees cannot use bathrooms that correspond with their gender identity.

The Daily Signal, a conservative news website, reported the State Department announced the new policy in a memo titled “Updates Regarding Biological Sex and Intimate Spaces, Including Restrooms.”

The State Department has not responded to the Los Angeles Blade’s request for comment on the directive.

“The administration affirms that there are two sexes — male and female — and that federal facilities should operate on this objective and longstanding basis to ensure consistency, privacy, and safety in shared spaces,” State Department spokesperson Tommy Piggot told the Daily Signal. “In line with President Trump’s executive order this provides clear, uniform guidance to the department by grounding policy in biological sex as determined at birth.”

President Donald Trump shortly after he took office in January 2025 issued an executive order that directed the federal government to only recognize two genders: male and female. The sweeping directive also ordered federal government agencies to “effectuate this policy by taking appropriate action to ensure that intimate spaces designated for women, girls, or females (or for men, boys, or males) are designated by sex and not identity.”

The Daily Signal notes the new State Department policy “does not prohibit single-occupancy restrooms.”

Federal authorities have charged a transgender woman with kidnapping after she allegedly fled to Cuba with her 10-year-old child.

An affidavit that Federal Bureau of Investigation Special Agent Jennifer Waterfield filed in U.S. District Court for the District of Utah on April 16 notes the child is a “biological male who identifies as a female” and “splits time living with divorced parents who share custody” in Cache County, Utah.

Waterfield notes the child on March 28 “was supposed to be traveling by car to” Calgary, Alberta, “for a planned camping trip with his transgender mother, Rose Inessa-Ethington, Rose’s partner, Blue Inessa-Ethington, and Blue’s 3-year-old child.”

The affidavit notes the group instead flew from Vancouver, British Columbia, to Mexico City on March 29. Waterfield writes the Inessa-Ethingtons and the two children then flew from Mérida, Mexico, to Havana on April 1.

The 10-year-old child called her biological mother on March 28 after they arrived in Canada. The custody agreement, according to the affidavit, required Rose Inessa-Ethington to return the child to her former spouse on April 3.

“Interviews of MV [Minor Victim] 1’s family members provided significant concerns for MV 1’s well-being, as MV 1 was born a male, however, identifies as a female child, which is largely believed to be due to manipulation by Rose Inessa-Ethington,” reads the affidavit. “Concerns exist that MV 1 was transported to Cuba for gender reassignment surgery prior to puberty.”

The affidavit indicates authorities found a note in the Inessa-Ethingtons’ home with “instruction from a mental health therapist located in Washington, D.C., including instruction to send the therapist the $10,000.00 and instructions on gender-affirming medical care for children.”

The affidavit does not identify the specific “mental health therapist” in D.C.

A Utah judge on April 13 ordered Rose Inessa-Ethington to “immediately” return the child to her former spouse. The former spouse also received sole custody.

“Your affiant believes that due to the extensive planning and preparation exhibited by both Rose Inessa-Ethington and Blue Inessa-Ethington to isolate MV 1 and take MV 1 to Havana, Cuba, without notifying or requesting permission from MV 1’s mother indicates they are likely not planning to return to the United States,” wrote Waterfield.

The affidavit notes Cuban authorities found the Inessa-Ethingtons and the child.

A press release the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Utah issued notes the Inessa-Ethingtons “were deported from Cuba” on Monday “with the assistance of the FBI.”

The couple has been charged with International Parental Kidnapping. The Inessa-Ethingtons were arraigned in Richmond, Va., on Monday. The press release notes a federal court in Salt Lake City will soon handle the case.

The New York Times reported the child is now back with their biological mother.

“We are grateful to law enforcement for working swiftly to return the child to the biological mother,” said First Assistant U.S. Attorney Melissa Holyoak of the District of Utah in the press release.

The case is unfolding against the backdrop of increased tensions between Washington and Havana after U.S. forces on Jan. 3 seized now former Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores.

President Donald Trump shortly after he took office in January 2025 issued an executive order that directed the federal government to only recognize two genders: male and female. A second White House directive banned federally-funded gender-affirming care for anyone under 19.

The U.S. Supreme Court last year in the Skrmetti decision upheld a Tennessee law that bans gender-affirming care for minors.

Cuba’s national health care system has offered free sex-reassignment surgeries since 2008.

Activists who are critical of Mariela Castro, the daughter of former President Raúl Castro who spearheads LGBTQ+ issues as director of Cuba’s National Center for Sexual Education, have previously told the Washington Blade that access to these procedures is limited. The Blade on Wednesday asked a contact in Havana to clarify whether Cuban law currently allows minors to undergo sex-reassignment surgery.

Gay dating and hookup app Grindr will host its first-ever White House Correspondents’ Weekend party on April 24.

The event is scheduled for the night before the White House Correspondents’ Dinner, an annual gathering meant to celebrate the First Amendment, honor journalism, and raise money for scholarships.

The White House Correspondents’ Dinner is organized by the White House Correspondents’ Association, a group of journalists who regularly cover the president and the administration.

An invitation obtained by the Washington Blade’s Joe Reberkenny and Michael K. Lavers reads:

“We’d be thrilled to have you join us at Grindr’s inaugural White House Correspondents’ Dinner Weekend Party, a Friday evening gathering to bring together policymakers, journalists, and LGBTQ community leaders as we toast the First Amendment.”

The Blade requested an interview with Joe Hack, Grindr’s head of global government affairs, but was unable to reach him via phone or Zoom. He did, however, provide a statement shared with other outlets, offering limited explanation for why the company decided 2026 was the year for the app to host this event.

“Grindr represents a global community with real stakes in Washington. The issues being debated here — HIV funding, digital privacy, LGBTQ+ human rights — are daily life for our community. Nobody does connections like Grindr, and WHCD weekend is the most iconic place in the country to make them. We figured it was time to host.”

Hack said the company has been “well received” by lawmakers in both parties and has found “common ground” on issues such as HIV funding and keeping minors off the app. He credited longstanding relationships in Washington and what he described as Grindr’s “respectful” approach to lobbying.

Hack, a longtime Republican-aligned lobbyist, previously worked for several GOP lawmakers, including U.S. Sens. Deb Fischer (R-Neb.), Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.), George Voinovich (R-Ohio), Bill Frist (R-Tenn.), and U.S. Rep. Randy Forbes (R-Va.).

According to congressional disclosure forms compiled by OpenSecrets, Grindr spent $1.3 million on lobbying in 2025— more than Tinder and Hinge’s parent company Match Group.

“This is going to be elevated Grindr,” Hack told TheWrap when describing the invite-only party that has already generated buzz on social media. “This isn’t going to be a bunch of shirtless men walking around. This is going to be very elevated, elegant, but still us.”

He also pointed to the company’s work on HIV-related initiatives, including efforts to maintain federal funding for healthcare partners that distribute HIV self-testing kits through the app.

The event comes at a particularly notable moment for an LGBTQ-focused connection platform to enter the Washington social circuit at a high-profile political weekend, as LGBTQ rights remain under constant attack from conservative lawmakers, particularly around transgender healthcare, sports participation, and public accommodations.

President Donald Trump became famous for his use of the phrase “You’re fired!” while hosting the reality TV show “The Apprentice” in the early 2000s. However, during his time in the Oval Office, he has attempted to distance himself from that image.

Despite those efforts, the phrase once again comes to mind as Trump has fired two high-level female Cabinet members within the past month: Pam Bondi and Kristi Noem.

Their replacements — Todd Blanche at the Justice Department and Markwayne Mullin at the Department of Homeland Security — bring records that, while different in depth, both reflect limited support for LGBTQ+ protections and, in some cases, direct opposition.

Todd Blanche

Acting attorney general

Little has been found regarding Todd Blanche’s LGBTQ+ history prior to his role as acting head of the Department of Justice. Unlike those who have worked within the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division or served as state attorneys general, he has not developed a public-facing legal ideology on LGBTQ+ issues.

Blanche attended American University for his undergraduate studies — like fellow Trump attorney Michael Cohen — where he met his future wife, Kristin, who was studying at nearby Catholic University in D.C.

He began his legal career as an intern at the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Washington, which eventually became a full-time position. He later worked as a paralegal in the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York while attending Brooklyn Law School at night. Blanche graduated cum laude in 2003. He and his wife later married and had two children.

Blanche left the U.S. attorney’s office in 2014, taking a job in the Manhattan office of the law firm WilmerHale. In September 2017, he moved to Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft LLP, where he was a partner in the White Collar Defense and Investigations practice.

In his personal capacity, he represented several figures associated with Donald Trump and former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani, including Trump’s former campaign manager Paul Manafort, businessman Igor Fruman, and attorney Boris Epshteyn.

In 2024, Blanche switched from Democrat to Republican, aligning himself with Trump’s political orbit. He later served as Trump’s personal defense attorney in the New York State case that led to Trump’s 2024 conviction on 34 felony counts of falsifying business records to cover up hush-money payments to bisexual adult film star Stormy Daniels.

Now the highest-ranking official at the Justice Department, Blanche has played a central role in overseeing the department and has been involved in leadership decisions tied to several controversial actions affecting LGBTQ+ people.

In a letter to New York Attorney General Letitia James, Blanche declared that the Justice Department “will not sit idly by while you attempt to use your office to force harmful procedures on our most vulnerable population,” if legal action were taken against NYU Langone. The hospital had “permanently” ended a program earlier that month after the Trump-Vance administration threatened to pull all federal funding if it continued prescribing puberty blockers and hormones to minors.

Blanche wrote that “the Justice Department believes the law is clear, and anti-discrimination laws cannot be used to force NYU Langone to perform sex-rejecting procedures on children.”

“As just one example, your office’s position would require a hospital to prescribe certain medications for certain diagnoses, regardless of the hospital’s or its doctors’ independent medical determination about the propriety of such treatment,” he said.

Blanche also echoed his predecessor’s public stance on limiting LGBTQ+-related protections at the federal level, aligning with Bondi’s sentiments in June 2025 regarding the U.S. Supreme Court’s 6–3 decision that restricted LGBTQ+ history lessions in schools and limits lower federal courts from issuing nationwide injunctions — rulings that have often blocked Trump administration policies.

Calling it “another great decision that came down today,” Blanche argued that the ruling “restores parents’ rights to decide their child’s education,” adding: “It seems like a basic idea, but it took the Supreme Court to set the record straight, and we thank them for that. And now that ruling allows parents to opt out of dangerous trans ideology and make the decisions for their children that they believe is correct.”

In December 2025, a Justice Department memo stated that, “effective immediately,” prisons and jails would no longer be held responsible for violations of standards meant to protect LGBTQ+ people from harassment, abuse, and rape under the Prison Rape Elimination Act. The law, passed unanimously by Congress in 2003, requires that incarcerated people be screened for their risk of sexual assault, including consideration of LGBTQ+ status, and applies to all correctional facilities.

Additionally, when the Justice Department, under Blanche’s deputy leadership and at Trump’s behest, attempted to force Children’s National Hospital in D.C. to turn over medical records related to gender-affirming care, U.S. District Judge Julie R. Rubin ruled that the effort “appears to have no purpose other than to intimidate and harass.”

Blanche is also described as having a “strong belief in executive authority.”

Markwayne Mullin

Secretary of Homeland Security

While Blanche’s record is defined more by recent actions than a long paper trail, Markwayne Mullin brings a more established history on LGBTQ+ issues from his time in Congress.

The head of the Department of Homeland Security has served in Congress since 2013, in both the U.S. House of Representatives and U.S. Senate. He has been actively engaged in shaping restrictions and aligns with broader cultural rhetoric that frames anti-LGBTQ+ speech as protected expression.

In May 2016, Mullin criticized the Department of Education and the Justice Department’s “Dear Colleague” letter on transgender students, arguing that trans girls should not use girls’ restrooms in public schools.

By January 2021, Mullin and then-Hawaii Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard had introduced a bill to prevent trans women from participating in women’s sports.

Mullin was not recorded as voting on the final passage of the Respect for Marriage Act, which codified federal recognition of same-sex and interracial marriage.

In 2023, Mullin received a rating of just 6 percent from the Human Rights Campaign.

While serving in the Senate and as a member of the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) Committee, Mullin has been a vocal critic of policies aimed at expanding LGBTQ+ inclusion in federal programs. He has participated in broader Republican efforts questioning equity-based implementation of the Older Americans Act, including guidance related to sexual orientation and gender identity in aging services, arguing such policies could have unintended consequences.

Mullin also makes history as the first Native American — and a citizen of the Cherokee Nation — to lead the Department of Homeland Security.

He was among the 147 Republicans who voted to overturn the 2020 presidential election results despite no evidence of widespread fraud, and was present in the House on Jan. 6.

At a critical moment for West Hollywood and cities across the United States, Jonathan Wilson comes forward with a candidacy for West Hollywood City Council that is grounded in advocacy and a crystal-clear call for change. In our conversation, Wilson reflects on the decision to enter public office as a necessary response to widening divides, shifting political realities, and the urgent necessity for leadership that is both responsive and representative. His perspective is founded on years of navigating spaces where identity and opportunity aren’t always aligned, fueling a commitment to ensure that more voices are not just included, but actually heard and addressed.

Drawing from his experiences as a Black and queer Angeleno, as well as his work across corporate, civic, and community spheres, Wilson speaks to the power of identity as both a lens and a responsibility. He approaches leadership with an emphasis on accountability, innovation, and equity, from addressing public safety to the always-evolving priorities of LGBTQ+ communities. The result is a clear portrait of a candidate focused on practical solutions, intentional inclusion, and structural change that moves beyond rhetoric to deliver real, much-needed impact.

You’ve described your decision to run as a moment where you realized meaningful change  requires stepping up. What in particular made this the right time for you to throw your hat  in the race? 

At this time, when our country is so divided, and there are increasing barriers to support our California residents at a state level, I believe that now is the time for me to help my community and residents in the City of West Hollywood. I can best accomplish that by stepping up and becoming involved as an elected official in my local West Hollywood City Council. 

This November election will be pivotal for the future of our residents. While I applaud our City  Council on various levels, I believe that there are key perspectives that will be lost when two prominent City Council members term out. 

That provides me with an opportunity to help place more focus on the needs of our residents, attract more businesses and workers to our great city, and increase safety. It pains me to see businesses close and drive by an increasing number of empty storefronts. It hurts to hear residents say they feel like they can’t afford to live in the city any longer and to read the headlines about people being attacked on the street. 

If elected, you’d become the first Black City Council member and the first Black  LGBTQ+ councilmember in Los Angeles County. Can you describe from your perspective the sheer significance of this? 

West Hollywood has never had a Black City Council member.  

The significance is about the diversity of voices. Having a seat at the table. But this isn’t about race;  it’s about the representation of the diverse residents in my community and helping all people within my community. I just happen to be Black. 

While I’m not hanging my hat on being the black voice, it does add a bit more flavor to what I  can offer as a City Council member. I’m also the only candidate operating a for-profit company, and I’m in the process of building a family through surrogacy. My family journey creates a unique perspective because I’m not just thinking about myself, I’m thinking about what’s right for families with kids who live in this great city. 

Studies show that leading organizations perform better when they have diverse perspectives at the top. For the City of West Hollywood, the top of our government is the City Council – and that’s where I believe I can make the most impact.

While it’s unfortunate that a Black City Council member has never existed in a city that is known for its progressive politics, I believe I am the right person at this moment in our history,  who happens to be Black. 

How have your identities as a Black & queer Los Angelino shaped your understanding of  leadership and representation? 

This is a tough one because throughout my life, I have been one of a few. This goes all the way back to being one of two or three people in my AP and Honors classes at Palisades High School  — Pali High. Even though the school was diverse at the time, I was still the odd man out.  

I have also worked with a variety of Fortune 100 and 500 companies on projects as a management consultant for Accenture and Deloitte Consulting. There were very few executives of color at some of these organizations, and rarely any Black LGBTQ executives. 

There is a unique experience that many LGBTQ people of color share within mainstream  LGBTQ spaces that also seems to parallel that of non-LGBTQ spaces. That is – their voices are muted. Do I think that Los Angeles and WEHO are significantly more accepting of people of color and LGBTQ people than many other parts of our country? Yes! However, there is still work to be done.  

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Jonathan Wilson (@wilson4weho)

What experiences in your personal journey would you say most prepared you to run for  public office? 

Great question. I’ve always been involved in leadership positions — in high school and college,  in business organizations where I worked, and for non-profits where I’ve volunteered. Specific to West Hollywood, I have been part of the Social Justice Advisory Board (originally the Social  Justice Task Force) for over five years. I am a current member and past board member of the West Hollywood Chamber of Commerce. And, I have helped influence/lead key initiatives for the City as it relates to small business initiatives and advocating for residents. 

I see a gap in the leadership of our great city, and I really want to serve. I want to help make things better. I also really believe and live by President Obama’s quotes, “We are the change that  we seek” and “We are the change that we have been waiting for.” I was waiting to see someone who understood what businesses needed while also addressing the needs of residents. And now I  believe that person must be me. 

You’ve highlighted public safety as one of your key issues. What does “public safety that  works” look like for folks in West Hollywood? 

I have developed a lot of respect for our Sheriff’s department, security ambassadors, and our  city staff who collectively work to provide our public safety. 

For me, “public safety that works” involves a couple of things — one that focuses on continuous process improvement, and another that focuses on technology enablement. We must improve efficiency in our processes and update them with modern technology to support those processes. 

How does that pertain the public safety? I’ve seen people walk out of the sheriff’s department without making a report because of the long wait. In addition, the City Council approved a drone system several years ago, and it has not yet been implemented. Why can’t our city launch a simple drone initiative? That boils down to proper planning, processes, and execution.  

There are many processes and technology solutions that can be implemented without requiring a significant amount of funds. I’m happy to get more granular, but the bottom line is that we can do better in protecting our city. 

We also need more eyes, watching and reporting. 

How will you go about fostering stronger trust between the community and law  enforcement? 

This is an excellent question because it boils down to trust. Transparency and simplified reports for the public can really assist with trust. I review reports regularly that are presented at the  Public Safety meetings, and they don’t really inform the public on what they need to know to stay safe. We’re not focused on metrics that matter. As a data person, I think we need a live dashboard with metrics the public can view – and in plain language they can understand. We can also consider developing a Community Task Force that is focused on solutions that help to build trust. 

I recognize that law enforcement may feel underappreciated. At the same time, they don’t do themselves any favors by providing inaccurate accounts of the true state of public safety in West Hollywood. My answer is to fix the problem – not mask it. 

What creativity will you be taking to revitalize empty storefronts and support local  businesses? 

West Hollywood primarily focuses on providing reports on the many restaurants, bars, retail shops, and hotels in our City. However, there are so many other industries that can also add value to our City. I believe we need to focus on creating incentives for a variety of industries to come to West Hollywood.  

As a native Angeleno, I love our media and entertainment industries. Many of my friends are in the industry as creatives, production support, and/or investors. I would like to find incentives that can work for property owners and their realtors that would permit entertainment companies to film in some of the empty storefronts, to bring in revenue to West Hollywood. I would also like to take a deeper dive on what positive incentives can be made towards encouraging more businesses to migrate to our City, which will ultimately help all businesses.  

As of late 2024, according to our City staff, we have never implemented industry-specific incentives for businesses to come to West Hollywood. Most businesses I know would appreciate a good deal. 

Bottom line is that I believe incentives will help the local economy thrive by attracting new businesses and increasing tourism. Los Angeles is hosting the 2028 Olympics, so we’ve got to get busy. 

Housing remains an ever-present issue across Los Angeles. What new or practical solutions  would you advocate to maintain affordability in West Hollywood? 

I have been a strong advocate of the West Hollywood Community Housing Corporation (WHCHC), and I like the idea of affordable housing. In addition, I believe that with more money coming from taxes based on our potential business growth, our City will eventually produce more money to give back to the residents, which will allow them to stay in their homes in West Hollywood. I look for win-win solutions and am a strong believer that if we do this right,  everyone can win in our City. 

In a city with a long history of LGBTQ advocacy, what new or evolving priorities do you  believe need attention at this moment in time? 

While I am concerned about some of our recent advancements with marriage and reproductive rights, my biggest concern lies with our transgender community. I’m saddened every day by the level of vulnerability that exists with our trans family members. Anything we can do to help advance their level of safety, provide adequate health support, and assist with ensuring their human rights are not being violated remains among my top priorities. 

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Jonathan Wilson (@jonwil21)

How do queer politics today differ from decades past, and how does/will that impact your  campaign? 

Representation matters. I think it’s time to hear ideas from BIPOC LGBTQ representatives. I  would love to be in a position where I could help lift others. Today is similar to and different from past decades regarding queer politics. Today, the federal government is working to dismantle rights that have existed for years now. Whereas, in the past, the LGBTQ community was fighting for those rights. And many organizations, including the private sector, are uncertain on how to provide support without fear of retaliation.  

What does inclusive leadership mean to you beyond representation?

Inclusive leadership means that we have diversity of thought – pluralism of ideas — helping to lead our great City. I voted for some of our City Council members — not always because I agreed with all of their policies — but because they had a unique perspective that I believed would benefit our City. It would be an unfathomable scenario if everyone thought alike and agendas were simply rubber-stamped without meaningful questions being raised or serious dialogue being had. Passion for the community, lived experiences, commitment to doing what’s right for the City, ethics and integrity– in addition to educational background and career skills- should all be considered when electing a City Council member. Any City Council bearing those traits will focus on delivering the best solutions for the people of West Hollywood. 

What challenges do you foresee as a fresh candidate entering local politics, and how are  you preparing yourself and your team to meet them? 

As a new candidate, I am learning as I go. I bring a passionate commitment to my community and an ethical approach to politics. I hope my competitors will join me. I am running to support the people in my community. To help make West Hollywood a better place to live and work. I  am talking to residents, businesses, law enforcement, industries, trade unions, and most importantly – the people who live here. I am listening to what the people want. I plan to host listening sessions because I want to digest the diverse voices so I can represent ALL OF THE  PEOPLE. My team is focused on scheduling me to talk with a variety of groups, and I plan to canvas my local community, door by door, and ask the people for their vote. 

Looking into the near future, what would success look like at the end of your first term if  (or when) you are elected? 

My first term would start in January of 2027 and last through January 2031. At the end of those  four years, I would like to see the following: 

1) Residents feel like they can afford to live in the City of West Hollywood and that the city adequately supports their basic needs regardless of stage of life, whether it’s starting their career, growing a family, or aging in place as a retired individual. 

2) A thriving economy where new industries are emerging in the city and legacy footholds  (like media and entertainment) are demonstrating a renewed presence in the City. 3) Simplified government processes, enabled by policy and technology, with people who are  working together for the safety and good of the residents in the City of West Hollywood.

For more information about Wilson’s candidate campaign, head to Wilson4Weho.com

The Council for Global Equality is among the groups that condemned President Donald Trump on Tuesday over his latest threats against Iran.

Trump in a Truth Social post said “a whole civilization will die tonight” if Tehran did not reach an agreement with the U.S. by 8 p.m. ET (5 p.m. PT) on Tuesday.

Iran is among the handful of countries in which consensual same-sex sexual relations remain punishable by death.

Israel and the U.S. on Feb. 28 launched airstrikes against Iran.

One of them killed Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Iran in response launched missiles and drones against Israel and other countries that include Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Azerbaijan, and Cyprus.

Gas prices in the U.S. and around the world continue to increase because the war has essentially closed the Strait of Hormuz, a strategic waterway that connects the Persian Gulf and the Gulf of Oman through which roughly 20 percent of the world’s crude oil passes.

Trump less than 90 minutes before his deadline announced a two-week ceasefire with Iran that Pakistan helped broker.

“We the undersigned human rights, humanitarian, civil liberties, faith-based and environmental organizations, think tanks and experts are deeply alarmed by President Trump’s threat regarding Iran that ‘a whole civilization will die tonight’ if his demands are not met. Such language describes a grave atrocity if carried out,” reads the statement that the Council for Global Equality more than 200 other organizations and human rights experts signed. “A threat to wipe out ‘a whole civilization’ may amount to a threat of genocide. Genocide is a crime defined by the Genocide Convention and by the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court as committing one or more of several acts ‘with intent to destroy in whole or in part a national, racial or religious groups as such.'”

The statement states “the law is clear that civilians must not be targeted, and they must also be protected from indiscriminate or disproportionate attacks.”

“Strikes on civilian infrastructure — such as the recent attack on a bridge and the attacks President Trump is repeatedly threatening to carry out to destroy power plants — have devastating consequences for the civilian population and environment,” it reads.

“We urge all parties to respect international law,” adds the statement. “Those responsible for atrocities, including crimes against humanity and war crimes, can and must be held accountable.”

The Alliance for Diplomacy and Justice, Amnesty International USA, Human Rights Watch, the American Civil Liberties Union, the NAACP, MADRE, and the Robert and Ethel Kennedy Human Rights Center are among the other groups that signed the letter.