Yesterday, Governor Newsom stated in a press release that he is dedicating over $140 million to keep statewide Planned Parenthood health centers running through the rest of the year until additional resources are identified. 

H.R. 1, also known as the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act,” was passed in July and includes detailed notes on the congressional budget, including cuts to various federal agencies and programs. In section 71113 of the bill, federal funding is restricted against “prohibited entities” that provide health services like abortions. Organizations like Planned Parenthood were also blocked from receiving federal reimbursement for providing essential care services to patients enrolled in Medicaid or Medi-Cal. 

Planned Parenthood traces its roots to the early 1900s, where it began as a clinic providing birth control resources. Today, there are over 100 Planned Parenthood health centers across California alone, providing abortion services, STI testing and treatment, gender affirming care, birth control options, and other reproductive care services. It has been a lifeline for many in accessing affordable care and education around their reproductive and sexual health.

The effects of H.R. 1 have cut deeply into local communities. As reported by local advocates and government representatives, the neighboring Planned Parenthood of Orange and San Bernardino Counties (PPOSBC) had to eliminate a primary health care service line that provided over 10,000 patients direct access to services like cancer screenings, birth control, and prenatal care.

This recent investment by the state highlights California as a “reproductive freedom state,” Newsom said in a statement. “[This] latest investment continues to show our belief in protecting access to essential health care in times of distress.”

The governor’s next steps in this defense include working with other legislative leaders to identify more long-term solutions for 2026 that will allow Planned Parenthood clinics to continue operating. “While we know Trump and Republicans’ attacks on reproductive health care are escalating, we remain confident that our state leaders will continue to stand with Planned Parenthood patients and providers and ensure they have the support necessary to endure the persistent assaults,” said Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California president Jodi Hicks in a separate statement.

This Monday, Governor Newsom issued a legislative update on over 150 bills that had passed legislation and were waiting on his decision on whether or not they would be chaptered into law. 11 of these bills advocated for queer community members, including their improved access to healthcare, more privacy rights, greater ease in changing their name and gender markers, as well as the expansion of adoption rights and the inclusion of two-spirit individuals into important funding and resource opportunities. 

Two were vetoed. 

AB 554: Greater access to HIV/AIDS preventative medicine (Vetoed)

First introduced in February, AB 554 was co-authored by local Assemblymember Mark González and San Francisco Assemblymember Matt Haney. Also known as the Protecting Rights, Expanding Prevention, and Advancing Reimbursement for Equity (PrEPARE) Act of 2025, the bill intended to expand patients’ access to various forms of FDA-approved HIV/AIDS preventative medication. It would have prohibited health insurance plans from subjecting these forms of medication to prior authorization, step therapy, or cost-sharing. It would have also required the state to reimburse local agencies for administering this medicine, alleviating the strain on small clinics to meet the demand of community members in need of PrEP. 

Though LGBTQ+ civil rights groups like Equality California rallied support for the bill, it was returned by the governor without a signature. In a veto memo, he wrote that he “wholeheartedly [supports] efforts to ensure affordable and accessible prevention and treatment of HIV/AIDS” but questioned whether the bill would actually increase the affordability of and access to necessary preventative treatment. “By exceeding the cost-sharing provisions under the ACA [Affordable Care Act], this bill would result in increased costs to health plans, which would then be passed on to consumers.” 

In response, Assemblymember González wrote to the Blade about his disappointment. Still, he remains hopeful about the state of PrEP access. “I’m deeply grateful to Governor Newsom for his continued partnership and for standing with us in protecting access to PrEP through this year’s budget.”

SB 418: Stronger access to gender-affirming care without discrimination (Vetoed)

Authored by Senator Caroline Menjivar, SB 418 would have required a health care service plan to cover up to a 12-month supply of FDA-approved prescription hormone therapy and the supplies needed by an individual to self-administer this medication without being subjected to utilization management methods like prior authorization.

The bill was also intended to prohibit health insurers from denying a patient the ability to enroll in or renew their health insurance plans based on factors like sex characteristics, intersex traits, and gender identity. 

In late January, President Trump released a statement that the federal government would “not fund, sponsor, promote, assist, or support the so-called ‘transition’ of a child from one sex to another.” As healthcare for trans, gender-expansive, and intersex (TGI) individuals becomes increasingly unstable under the current administration, SB 418 aimed to protect TGI community members and their ability to access critical and necessary hormone therapy and gender-affirming care. 

In the governor’s veto memo, he wrote that he was “concerned” about the bill’s limitation on utilization management methods. For him, it’s an “important tool [that ensured] enrollees receive the right care at the right time. Prohibiting this cost constraint strategy is likely to result in an increase in enrollee premiums to offset costs incurred by health plans and insurers.” 

For Senator Menjivar, this decision was “heartbreaking” as TGI individuals continue to face barriers to vital care. “SB 418 was the most tangible and effective legislative tool introduced this year to help TGI folks weather this political storm,” Menjivar wrote to the Blade. Still, she says that she is committed to continue fighting to secure health care access for TGI community members.

The vetoing of these two bills was a major blow for LGBTQ+ civil rights organizations and advocates. Equality California executive director Tony Hoang wrote about his disappointment in a recent press release. “These bills would have guaranteed that transgender people and their families could continue to access essential medications without disruption and that people at risk of HIV could obtain PrEP quickly and affordably,” wrote Hoang. “The Governor’s decision to veto these measures undermines California’s longstanding leadership in advancing health equity and protecting the LGBTQ+ community.”

But with these setbacks came a number of wins. Governor Newsom passed nine other bills advancing the rights of LGBTQ+ individuals. 

SB 59: Confidentiality protections for trans and nonbinary individuals

This bill, authored by Senator Scott Wiener, will ensure that when someone files a legal petition to change their name or their gender marker, these court records are kept confidential. Additionally, SB 59 will prohibit people other than the petitioner to post these confidential records online.

AB 678: Creating an LGBTQ+ inclusive council on homelessness

Created by Assemblymember Alex Lee, AB 678 will require the governor to build an Interagency Council on Homelessness that will form relationships between federal and state agencies with local, on-the-ground coalitions and nonprofit organizations that focus on working with unhoused communities. Together, they will work on creating strategies to end homelessness.

The bill also specifically requires this council to actively work with LGBTQ+ leaders and community members to ensure that the strategies it develops are inclusive and culturally competent. 

AB 1525: Restricting disciplinary action against attorneys on the basis of “sensitive services,” which includes gender-affirming care 

The California State Assembly’s Committee on Judiciary created this bill to prohibit disciplinary action against attorneys who receive, advocate for, recommend, or enable “sensitive services,” which include health care services for sexual and reproductive health, sexually transmitted illnesses, and gender-affirming care. 

AB 1084: Streamlining court processes for name and gender marker changes 

Created by Assemblymember Rick Zbur, AB 1084 aims to quicken the process and limit barriers transgender and nonbinary individuals face when filing to change their name and gender marker. The bill will require courts to issue orders within six weeks from when a petition is filed, and without a hearing. The bill will also prohibit others from being able to file an objection to a petitioner’s name or gender marker change.

SB 450: Protecting adoption rights for LGBTQ+ parents and families 

Authored by Senator Menjivar, SB 450 will allow queer parents from other states to claim parentage rights to their adopted children born in California. “The signing of SB 450 is a win for LGBTQ+ parents who want what every parent wants, the protection of their legal rights as the parents of their children,” Senator Menjivar wrote to the Blade. “SB 450 clarifies California’s longstanding jurisdiction for adoption proceedings, including confirmatory adoptions, in cases where the families no longer live, or never lived, in the state but the child was born here. This means LGBTQ+ families, who are weighing the options of potentially leaving an affirming state to a Red state for financial reasons, can at least now feel confident that decision won’t cost them their parental rights.” 

SB 497: Protecting right to gender-affirming care from out-of-state law enforcement

Authored by Senator Wiener, SB 497 is another bill focused on providing protections for transgender and nonbinary individuals. It will prohibit healthcare providers and service plans from releasing medical information related to gender-affirming care for a patient who is being pursued by out-of-state law enforcement officials. SB 497 would also generally safeguard against out-of-state subpoenas that would prevent a person’s ability to access gender-affirming care.

SB 590: Including chosen family members in paid family leave laws

Authored by Senator Maria Durazo, this bill would alter existing laws around paid family leave, which currently provides wage replacement benefits for up to eight weeks for workers who take time off work to take care of seriously ill family members. SB 590 will expand this definition of family members to include “designated” persons. For many queer individuals, their “chosen family” members are often just as crucial, if not more than, their blood relatives. This bill opens up the scope of what is considered a family member, allowing LGBTQ+ individuals wage protections if they take time away to care for these loved ones.

AB 1487: Expanding equity fund to include two-spirit communities 

Co-authored by Assemblymembers Dawn Addis and Mark González, AB 1487 will rename the existing Transgender, Gender Nonconforming, and Intersex Wellness and Equity Fund to the Two-Spirit, Transgender, Gender Nonconforming, and Intersex (2TGI) Wellness and Equity Fund. This will enable the fund to grant financial support to organizations that serve two-spirit and LGBTQ+ tribal community members in a number of services, including: workforce development training, resettlement and social integration programs, youth outreach, healthcare support, and more. 

AB 82: Confidentiality protections for patients and providers of reproductive and gender-affirming care 

Authored by Assemblymember Chris Ward, this bill will allow reproductive or gender-affirming health care patients and service providers who face violence and harassment because of their association with such care to request that state and local agencies protect the confidentiality of their identities and addresses. 

On September 24th, 13 Congress members penned a letter to the governor, asking him to sign AB 554 — or the PrEPARE Act of 2025 — into law. If passed, the bill would strengthen existing state laws around health insurance coverage and access to preventative medication for individuals affected by HIV/AIDS. 

AB 554 would require health plans and insurers to cover all FDA-approved PrEP medications, including injectable forms, without prior authorization or step therapy. The bill’s co-authors and supporters emphasize the need to bolster support for impacted individuals and communities, ensuring that they can access effective treatment plans with as few systemic barriers as possible. The bill also includes protections for community clinics, so that they are reimbursed promptly and able to provide medication for impacted people.

In this letter, co-signed by local elected officials including District 42 Representative Robert Garcia, District 43 Representative Maxine Waters, and District 34 Representative Jimmy Gomez, the coalition of Congress members cites a number of reasons for this call to action. 

Namely, they state that the Department of Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.’s reported desire to oust all members of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force — an independent panel of disease prevention experts that provides recommendations to insurance companies, doctors, and other health professionals — is a move that “risks reversing decades of progress in the fight against HIV, one of the most devastating epidemics in history.” 

They also write in the letter that insurance cost-sharing restrictions are especially harmful towards Black and Latine communities, who “accounted for over 70% of new HIV diagnoses [in the state] yet remain significantly underrepresented among PrEP users compared to their White counterparts.” 

In a separate letter addressed on September 25th, over 90 advocacy groups and public health organizations similarly stressed the importance of AB 554 to the governor. Here, they discussed CVS Health’s decision to not approve coverage for Yeztugo, the first twice-yearly injectable PrEP medication, even though it was approved by the FDA in June. 

The organizations that have signed on include LGBTQ+ civil rights organization Equality California, as well as resource outreach groups such as the AIDS Healthcare Foundation and the California LGBTQ Health & Human Services Network. They write that CVS’s “dangerous decision underscores the urgent need for additional clarity in state law to ensure that all FDA-approved PrEP medications are covered without cost-sharing, guaranteeing that lifesaving innovations are available to Californians without delay.”

The letters highlight a need to address equity and accessibility for those impacted by HIV/AIDS, specifically those who belong to marginalized communities. AB 554 received a majority vote of support by both the California State Assembly and Senate on September 10th, and now waits in limbo for Governor Newsom’s signature. He has until October 12th to sign or veto the bill.

In the meantime, Equality California encourages community members to visit their website to learn more about the bill, other pending LGBTQ+ state legislation, and how they can support these movements.

Vice President Kamala Harris announced today that she will not run for Governor of California in 2026, putting to rest long-standing speculation about her political future. In a public statement, Harris said she spent the past six months reflecting on “the best way for [her] to continue fighting for the American people and advancing the values and ideals [she holds] dear.”

From her time in the courtroom to the Senate floor and the White House, Harris has built a career within the political system. But her latest message hints at a shift in strategy.

“We must be willing to pursue change through new methods and fresh thinking,” she wrote, “committed to our same values and principles, but not bound by the same playbook.”

While stepping back from the governor’s race, Harris made it clear she’s not stepping away from politics. She plans to campaign for Democrats nationwide and suggested more details about her next chapter are on the horizon.

Her announcement comes at a time when the Democratic Party is facing urgent questions about whether it will fully defend trans lives amid rising attacks. California Governor Gavin Newsom recently called it “deeply unfair” for transgender athletes to participate in girls’ sports. Former Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg echoed the same framing, saying, “most reasonable people agree that it’s a serious fairness issue.” These are not harmless statements; they are capitulations to anti-trans narratives that frame our right to exist and participate as something debatable.

These statements from two of the party’s most visible figures aren’t outliers either; they reflect a broader trend of Democratic leaders hedging their language or pandering to the center instead of standing firmly for trans people’s dignity and rights. While Harris didn’t mention trans issues in her statement, her record is also mixed. She has caused harm in the past but has shown signs of growth, becoming more publicly supportive of trans rights in recent years. Still, symbolic gestures are no longer enough. The real question now is: what comes next?

As Harris, Newsom, and Buttigieg emerge as likely contenders for the 2028 Democratic presidential nomination, transgender Americans and our allies are paying close attention. We are tired of being treated as a liability, a distraction, or a political bargaining chip. We are not a wedge issue.

We are voters. We are organizers. We are human beings. And we deserve to know which of these potential leaders will truly fight for us, not just when it’s politically safe, but when it matters most.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Kamala Harris (@kamalaharris)

President Donald Trump is making good on his threat to punish California officials for allowing transgender female student-athletes to compete with cisgender girls in school sports. 

On Wednesday, the U.S. Department of Justice announced it is suing the state’s Department of Education, claiming California’s policy to allow trans students to compete with other girls violates Title IX, the federal law that bans discrimination in education based on sex. The DOJ’s suit says California’s rules “are not only illegal and unfair but also demeaning, signaling to girls that their opportunities and achievements are secondary to accommodating boys.”

As the Washington Blade reported in June, this lawsuit follows a warning by the Trump administration to end the trans participation policy within 10 days or face referral to the DOJ as well as the loss of federal education funding.

And California may merely be the first to face legal action, according to U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi, who warned that the 21 other states which permit trans girls to compete in female athletics could also face challenges by the federal government.

“If you do not comply, you’re next,” she said in a video posted on the DOJ website. “We will protect girls in girls sports.” Bondi was joined by Secretary of Education Linda McMahon. 

The DOJ suit named California’s Education Department and the California Interscholastic Federation, the governing body for high school sports. A spokesperson for the CIF told the Associated Press the organization would not comment on pending litigation.

A spokesperson for Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom deferred to the CIF and the Department of Education in declining to comment on the lawsuit since the governor was not named a defendant. But Newsom’s office told the AP that the Trump administration’s attacks on its policies protecting transgender athletes are “a cynical attempt” to distract from the federal government’s withholding of funds for all students who benefit from after-school and summer programs.

Newsom, however, has come under criticism — most notably by the Human Rights Campaign — for remarks he made in March, that allowing transgender athletes to compete in women’s sports was “deeply unfair,” as the Blade reported. 

For more than a decade, California law has allowed students to participate in sex-segregated school programs, including on sports teams, and use bathrooms and other facilities that align with their gender identity.

But headlines about AB Hernandez, an out trans female high school student-athlete who won titles in the California track-and-field championships last month, drew condemnations from Assistant U.S. Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon, and President Trump himself. 

Following the meet, Dhillon wrote in a letter to the California Interscholastic Federation that it violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution by allowing trans girls to compete against other female athletes.

As for the lawsuit, DOJ claims California’s policies “ignore undeniable biological differences between boys and girls, in favor of an amorphous ’gender identity.’”

“The results of these illegal policies are stark: girls are displaced from podiums, denied awards, and miss out on critical visibility for college scholarships and recognition,” the suit says.

Last week, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear two cases challenging state bans on trans student-athletes, as the Blade reported. More than 20 states have limited trans girls from participating on girls sports teams, barred gender-affirming surgeries for minors and required parents to be notified if a child changes their pronouns at school. More than two dozen states have laws barring trans women and girls from participating in certain sports competitions. Challenges to some of those policies are still being decided by courts across the country. 

Back in February, the president signed an executive order that bans trans girls and women from participating in sports that match their gender identity, as the Blade reported.

Supporters of banning trans girls and women from competing include the conservative California Family Council, which has posted a petition online, arguing a ban would restore fairness in athletic competitions. Opponents like Equality California say bans are an attack on transgender youth.

“Local schools and athletic associations are the ones who should be handling these issues, and they are already creating policies that protect transgender youth and ensure a level playing field for all students. A federal ban that overrides those rules could require young girls to answer inappropriate personal questions or even be subjected to genital inspections by strangers if they want to participate in sports,” the organization said in a statement in February.

“The head of the NCAA, himself a former Republican Governor, recently told a U.S. Senate panel that he knew of less than 10 out transgender athletes among the 510,000 currently competing in college sports—less than .002 percent of all NCAA athletes.

“Studies confirm that participation in sports provides kids with invaluable life skills such as teamwork, leadership, discipline, and cooperation—fundamental lessons that every young person deserves the chance to experience. Beyond the field, sports also contribute significantly to students’ overall well-being, fostering better mental health, boosting academic performance, and enhancing self-esteem and confidence.”

Williams Institute at UCLA has released its latest report, highlighting the intersection between LGBTQ and immigration issues and the impact of the U.S. Customs and Immigration Enforcement (ICE) raids across Los Angeles on LGBTQ people. 

According to the brief, LGBTQ immigrants who hold legal status, but who are not naturalized citizens may also face challenges to their legal right to reside in the U.S. 

Recent reports indicate that non-citizens with legal status are being swept up in immigration operations and several forms of legal status which were granted at the end of the Biden administration are being revoked. Those include: Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for some Venezuelan immigrants, as well as those from Afghanistan and Cameroon, while Haitian nationals are now facing shortened protection periods, by up to six months. 

The Justice Department has proposed a new rule which grants the government border authority to revoke green card holders’ permanent residency status at any time. This rule is currently under review by the Third Circuit Court of Appeals, which could significantly affect non-citizens who are currently documented to reside in the county legally. 

Supervisorial District 1, under Supervisor Hilda L. Solis, and Supervisorial District 2, under Supervisor Holly J. Mitchell would particularly be affected as it contains the city center of Los Angeles and nearly 29,000 LGBTQ, noncitizens would face the harshest impact. Those two districts contain many of the county’s historically Black, Latin American and Asian, Pacific Islander neighborhoods. 

For transgender, nonbinary and intersex immigrants arrested or detained by ICE, there are additional impacts regarding how federal law defines biological sex and gender identity. The Trump administration has signed an executive order which redefines “sex” under federal law to exclude TGI individuals. This adds an extra thick layer of possible violence when TGI individuals are placed in detention centers or in holding that does not correspond to their identity.

According to the report, ‘transgender, non-binary, and intersex immigrants must navigate an

immigration and asylum system without information about how federal agents will respond to their gender identity and with the risk of greater violence if placed in detention centers, given the effects of this executive order.’

The brief estimates the number or foreign-born adults in Los Angeles County who will be potentially affected by the Trump administration’s executive orders on mass deportations. 

Graphic courtesy of Williams Institute at UCLA.

Using previous data from other Williams Institute Studies and reports from the University of Southern California Dornsife Equity Research Institute and data from the Pew Research Center, the latest brief states that there are over 1.35 million LGBTQ-identifying people across the U.S., with 30% of them residing in California. 

The report further points to 122,000 LGBTQ immigrants who reside within LA County specifically, making Los Angeles County home to about 10% of all LGBTQ adult immigrants in the U.S. 

While 18% of those Angelenos are foreign-born, only around 7%, or 49,000 of them do not hold legal status. 

Using research from the Pew Center and applying an estimate, that means that there are approximately 23,000 undocumented LGBTQ across LA County and the remaining 26,000 LGBTQ immigrants in the county have some form of legal status. 

Among the LGBTQ population of adult immigrants in California, approximately 41,000 are transgender or nonbinary. That figure also points toward approximately 5,200 of them residing in LA County. According to the proportions applied for this estimate, the Williams Institute approximates that around 3,100 transgender and nonbinary immigrants in LA County are naturalized citizens, over 1,100 have legal status and just under 1,000 are undocumented. 

According to a brief released in February by the Williams Institute, ‘mass deportations could impact 288,000 LGBTQ undocumented immigrants across the U.S.

In the heart of South Central Los Angeles lies Trinity Recreation Center, known as Trinity Park, considered what some might refer to as a “hood staple.”

Although there is no denying the park’s history of gang-related incidents and even death, for many, the park is also a place full of profound memories, cherished as one of the only green spaces and gathering places within a community that is often underserved. The park sits in the city’s 9th Council District (CD-9), a district known for its lack of green spaces. 

 South Central L.A. is often characterized by an over concentration of liquor stores and a lack of quality, affordable grocery stores and sit-down restaurants, contributing to high rates of heart disease, diabetes and premature death among South L.A. residents. 

For me, the park brings me back to a time when life was easier. It was the place where I made my first friend. This park was my large family’s front yard for over three years and a place that I have passed by and walked through for over two decades. 

Trinity Park was one of the first places I have memories of. A year after my family immigrated to the U.S., we moved into a three-bedroom house across the street from the park. The first year in the states was difficult for my mother, who juggled two jobs. 

For me, understanding very little English and not being able to speak it made it extremely difficult to communicate or connect with other kids and adults at school. My thick accent was always a point of concern and embarrassment. 

Trinity Park, which in the early 2000s was even more notorious for crime and shootings, was a special place for my family and me during the almost three years that we lived neighboring it. 

When my mother worked long hours, my aunts and uncles would take me to the park at least twice a week, where I would run uncontrollably and ride the swings for as long as possible. The park, in a sense, saw me grow up and helped me build a close sense of community at a time when I felt very alone and isolated. 

That, too, is what the park has been to many of the kids and community living in the park’s surroundings. Trinity Park, is also located 12 minutes from downtown L.A., in an area of South Central L.A. known as Historic South Central within CD-9, where the majority of the population is composed of Black and Latino working-class families. 

The Trinity Recreation Center opened its doors in 1968. In the last few years, there have been significant upgrades and additions to the park, including the 2016 opening of a synthetic soccer field and a skate park, which officially opened in 2021. 

To what to many outsiders might look like an unsafe and unpredictable piece of land, Trinity Park holds dear memories for many of those who have passed through or hung out in the park at some point in their lives. 

The park was also where I remember making my first true friend in L.A., a friendship that wasn’t sparked because we went to the same class or because our parents knew each other, but because of a simple connection between kids while playing. I don’t remember her name, but the photo below was taken the day I met her at Trinity Park. 

My mother, on one of her only days off, had taken me to the park. It was the summer of 2004 and we arrived at the park close to sunset. I wish I could recall more than us playing tag and running around the park, but I remember the feeling of making my first friend, one I had made on my own. We probably spent three to four hours together that day playing and at the end of it all, my mother ran across the street to bring her camera. I think she, too, wanted to preserve the memory, the feeling of seeing her daughter connect with another kid after what had been a very tough time in both of our lives. 

Brenda’s friend she made in Trini Park (L) and Brenda (R) pose together at Trinity Park in 2004.

(Photo courtesy of Brenda Fernanda Verano)

That was also the park where I taught myself to ride a bike and that gave me confidence, something that was hard for me to find as a kid. 

Later in life, although we moved out of the home across the street from the park, my family and I continued living in that same neighborhood and all throughout my high school journey, I walked through that park every day to get to school. In middle school, the park was also a meetup place for my friends and me after school, where we would hang out and share music playlists. 

The park has been a silent but consistent entity from childhood to now — adulthood — always in the background of pieces and times in my life.

EDITORS NOTE: This article was published through the Bezos Fellowship grant provided by the Ethnic Media Services, which recently changed its name to American Community Media. The article was written by Brenda Fernanda Verano, an award-winning journalist and reporter for CALÓ News, a local non-profit newsroom focusing on the Latin American community of Los Angeles.

ICE raids have taken place across Los Angeles County over the last few days and tens of thousands of Angelenos have taken to the streets to protest against the raids and the police brutality involved in the arrests.

The Trump administration has threatened to arrest Governor Gavin Newsom and L.A. Mayor Karen Bass if they were to interfere with the ICE raids. In response, California has now filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration.

Early Monday morning, the U.S. Northern Command announced that it activated around 700 Marines, after the Pentagon and the Trump administration deployed around 2,000 National Guard troops to Los Angeles over the weekend. As of today, Trump has deployed double the amount of National Guard troops and ICE raids are said to continue for the next 30 days. The deployment is set to cost $134 million and last 60 days or more according to Secretary Pete Hegseth and a senior defense official. 

Reporters have been hit with rubber bullets, batons and have been tear gassed while trying to document the protests. There are eyewitness reports and video footage showing police officers trampling people over with horses, running people over with squad cars and detaining people who have legal status.

In a broadcast interview with CNN, Mayor Bass stated that she believes that if ICE raids hadn’t happened on Friday, we would not be seeing the type of disorder we are seeing. The Los Angeles Police Department declared Downtown L.A. an unlawful assembly area after union president David Huerta was detained by ICE along with several undocumented immigrants. Huerta appeared in court on Monday and was released on a $50,000 bond. 

LAPD Chief Jim Donnell says they have adapted their tactics to arrest people, but that they are ultimately “overwhelmed” by the number of protesters. 

“We have adapted our tactics to take these people into custody and to be able to hold them accountable,” said Chief Donnell. “We are overwhelmed as far as the number of people out there engaged in this type of activity,” 

Mayor Bass said she was “completely in sync” with what the police chief stated, adding that she believes there is enough video footage to prosecute protestors even if they did not get arrested on scene.

“Some people might think that just because they haven’t gotten arrested on the spot, that they’ve gotten away with it and the message I would send is: there’s ton of video tape and people who didn’t get arrested today for committing violent acts — don’t plan on the fact that you get off because you can get arrested in the next few days,” said Mayor Bass. 

Mayor Bass doubled-down on her statement regarding the ICE raids and how L.A. is a city of immigrants and ICE raids will continue to affect the local economy. 

There have also been reports that ICE raids are taking place across schools and graduation ceremonies. 

Los Angeles Unified School District is set to deploy school police to set up safe zones around graduations and school campuses amid these raids targeting celebrations. According to the LA Times, school police will patrol and guard campus entrances when ICE and Border Patrol are seen in the area. Graduation ceremonies will become sanctuaries for families until immigration agents disperse from the area. 

Medical providers like St. John’s Community Health released a statement on the issue. 

“The aggressive increase in ICE activity is forcing already vulnerable people to fear going to the doctor, school, or even the grocery store — and putting countless families in danger,” said Jim Mangia, president and CEO of St. John’s Community Health.

Community leaders like Tony Hoang, executive director at Equality California stated that as a child of immigrants, it deeply saddens him to see the ICE raids take place across Los Angeles.

“Equality California joins Governor Newsom and Attorney General Bonta in calling for an end to National Guard deployment. We condemn the raids that have occurred and are continuing, which are xenophobic and traumatizing to families, individuals, and communities,” he said.

“We stand in solidarity with immigrant communities across Los Angeles and the state—and we call on every leader, at every level of government, to reject this assault on our values and take urgent action to protect those under threat.”

A lot happened at last weekend’s high school state track and field championship meet in
Clovis, Calif. Parents of cisgender student-athletes booed the one and only transgender
girl competing. Police and security officers showed up in large numbers to keep
protestors apart and safeguard the competitors. Police made an arrest outside the
stadium after a demonstrator brandishing a transgender pride flag allegedly assaulted a
man described as a conservative activist and caused damage to his vehicle.

The trans student — 16-year-old AB Hernandez — finished a winner. But she wasn’t “the” winner.

As CBS News reported, “Hernandez took home first place medals in both high jump and
triple jump and she placed second in the long jump event. Following a rule change by
the California Interscholastic Federation, a co-winner was named in each of the three
events in which Hernandez placed.”

You didn’t misread that. Hernandez shared the podium with “co-winners.”

As the Blade reported last week, the CIF introduced a new “pilot entry process” that for
the first time, allowed judges to score trans athletes separately from cisgender
competitors, so there were three winners in every event: a cisgender male winner, a
cisgender female winner and a trans student-athlete winner.

The new policy was announced hours after President Donald Trump threatened to pull
“large scale federal funding” from the state if officials allowed trans athletes to compete
according to their gender identity.

Despite the policy change, the U.S. Department of Justice announced on social
media it was investigating State Attorney General Rob Bonta, State Superintendent of
Public Instruction Tony Thurmond, the Jurupa Unified School District, and the CIF for
potential violations of Title IX, as the Blade reported.

So what happens now? As KXTV reported, President Trump issued another threat to
pull funding on Monday in a post to his Truth Social account, not naming Hernandez but
labeling her “a biological male” and using his favorite derogatory nickname for
California’s Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom.

“A Biological Male competed in California Girls State Finals, WINNING BIG, despite the
fact that they were warned by me not to do so. As Governor Gavin Newscum fully
understands, large scale fines will be imposed!!!”

Now, the pundits are weighing-in. Sara Pequeño wrote in USA Today how she was
encouraged to see Hernandez share the 2nd place podium with Brooke White and “put
their arms around each other.”

“They’re setting an example for how all of us should treat our trans neighbors, i.e.,
treating them like human beings, not enemies,” she wrote.

As Pequeño noted, Save Women’s Sports, an anti-trans advocacy group, could only
identify five trans students in the entire United States who were competing on girls’
teams from kindergarten through grade 12 in 2023. “That group’s entire existence is to
hate trans athletes, and they found very little to hate,” she wrote.

According to the president of the NCAA, there are fewer than 10 student-athletes
who publicly identify as transgender out of the more than 500,000 competing at the
collegiate level.

Pequeño was not alone in finding joy in the rules change that brought cisgender and
transgender girls together on a podium, each of them a “co-winner.” So did self-
proclaimed “trans advocate” Cyd Zeigler.

He’s one of the co-founders of the LGBTQ+ sports site Outsports, who in 2023
infamously came close to endorsing Florida Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis for
president, only to offer his regrets, following a backlash from readers. Zeigler penned an
op-ed Wednesday originally titled “California trans athlete policy is something everyone
can embrace.”

“Everyone?” Not this sports editor.

He called the new CIF policy “the best possible path in 2025 to trans participation in
sports.”

In celebrating this change, Zeigler also trashed “goal-post-moving trans advocates” and
policies in California and Connecticut that allow “a trans girl to run in boys track meets
and, without a medical transition, later compete in girls meets,” meaning high school
competitions. “That’s bad policy,” declared Zeigler without evidence.

That policy in Connecticut has stood since 2011 and is enshrined in state law, and so far
has withstood legal challenges once again being heard in federal court.

Outsports at some point changed the headline of his screed to “New California trans
athlete policy is something we can embrace” and apparently made another significant
choice: Despite quoting the outlet’s one and only remaining transgender contributor,
Karleigh Webb, who opposes the rules change, Zeigler did not mention her by name.
Why?

In an article published before the championship, Webb wrote: “If AB Hernandez wins,
why should she have to share the spoils with someone else if’s not a tie? That’s what
professional transphobes like Jennifer Sey and Riley Gaines try to sell. Awarding a
duplicate medal gives their nonsense credence to the detriment of the sport and the
athletes.”
Webb is right. Zeigler and the CIF and Gov. Newsom are wrong. You either win, or you
lose, or if you prefer, you come in second, third, whatever. But “co-winners?”

That’s a crock.

Imagine if the Dodgers and Yankees shared the World Series trophy. Why shouldn’t the
49ers also win the Super Bowl alongside the Chiefs? Maybe Kamala Harris should be
declared a “co-winner” of last November’s election?

Personally, I’m glad to see Hernandez embraced by her cisgender peers. I’m relieved to
know that crowds cheering these amazing girls last weekend drowned out the hecklers
who showed up to boo a child. I’m encouraged that even if she had to share the win,
Hernandez was given her rightful place among the teens competing and proved she
was not only worthy of competing but did not win in every event.

So, she’s hardly “unbeatable.” Most trans athletes actually lose, as Zeigler wrote almost
six years ago, back before he started echoing anti-trans inclusion activists Martina Navratilova, Renee Richards and Nancy Hogshead-Makar.

If he really thinks the CIF “co-winners” rule is going to silence anti-trans forces, I think
he’s going to be very surprised by Riley Gaines and her crowd.

While it’s easy for Zeigler to concede public opinion has shifted, he should know
better than to blame those who pushed for inclusion, when it’s clear that conservative
voices in media and politicians, like his, are the ones responsible for influencing that
move to reject trans women’s right to compete in women’s sports. It’s a pendulum swing
that in time will undoubtedly swing back, once the science proves that trans women and
girls don’t always win. In fact, researchers have already proven some trans athletes are
at a disadvantage compared to their cisgender competitors.

Just as Parker Molloy reported that a Republican-commissioned study on gender
affirming care in Utah actually found “that youth who received care before age 18 had
better outcomes, especially around depression, anxiety and suicidality. Hormonal
treatments were associated with positive mental health and psychosocial functioning
outcomes.”

I believe the science is on the side of transgender Americans. Americans love a
winner. Not a “co-winner.”

Over the last three weeks, glendaleOUT — a local LGBTQ group based in Glendale, California and city leadership have been at odds over securing financial support of a family-friendly Pride event set to happen on Saturday, June 7. As of Tuesday, Glendale’s city council voted 3-2 in favor of funding the event, ending a weeks-long argument over securing the funds.

The controversy began when the group highlighted how neighboring cities have visibly demonstrated support for Pride Month celebrations across the county, while the City of Glendale has yet to sponsor events with banners, city logos and financial sponsorship. 

Councilmember Dan Brotman proposed $5,000 in sponsorship funds, noting that the city has funded other cultural events with much larger amounts. 

Local leaders, but specifically Mayor Ara Najarian — who was just re-elected for a fifth term — are pushing back and opposing the proposal for funding. According to sources, Mayor Najarian openly opposed the proposal, stating a distant conflict of interest as the reason for the opposition. 

LGBTQ advocates have been quoted as saying this is a “bad-faith political tactic, not grounded in any real conflict of interest.” 

The next potential vote is expected to happen today at a city council meeting. Organizers say that the Pride event will happen regardless, but that they still hope to shed light on the patterns of sexual orientation-based discrimination in the city council. 

For more information about the free community Pride event, visit glendaleOUT’s website.