Politics
President Biden oks change to filibuster for voting rights
Biden and the Vice-President Kamala Harris address the urgent need to pass legislation to protect the constitutional right to vote
ATLANTA – President Biden, after paying tribute to civil rights pioneer Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. by leaving a wreath on his grave, brought the strength of his presidency to bear in a speech Tuesday in an effort to reform U.S. Senate rules to enact voting rights legislation.
“I’m making it clear, to protect our democracy, I support changing Senate rules whichever way they need to changed to prevent a minority of senators from blocking basic voting rights,” Biden said.
Biden has indicated before he supports changes to longstanding rules the Senate requiring 60 votes to end a filibuster and proceed with debate on legislation, but the speech marks an elevation of viewpoint in a more formal way and increases the pressure on fellow Democrats like Joe Manchin (W.Va.) and Kyrsten Sinema (Ariz.), who oppose such a change.
Based on his words, Biden’s position on filibuster reform appears limited to voting rights legislation, which like so much other legislation has passed in the House and has stalled out in the Senate. The Washington Blade has placed a request in with the White House seeking comment on why, if Biden supports changing the filibuster for voting rights, why hasn’t he made the case for other issues, such as police reform or LGBTQ civil rights.
A major reason cited by Biden to bring the force of his presidency down on this issue: The attack on U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021 instigated by President Trump, who falsely claimed he won the 2020 election against Biden.
Biden conjured images of the long road in the civil rights journey in the United States and a “violet riot” at the Capitol that Biden said undermined the process.
The recently enacted voter law in Georgia, which makes mail-in voting illegal, limits hours and locations for ballot drop boxes and bars the delivery of food and water to persons waiting in line to vote, was another major focus for Biden, who pointed out Republican lawmakers in Georgia put it in place after he won the state in 2020 and Trump pressured officials there to find more votes for him.
As a result, Biden said the “threat to democracy is so grave” he supports changes to the filibuster, which came about in use in the Senate from senators seeking to block civili rights legislation.
“If that bare minimum is blocked, we have no choice but change the Senate rules, including getting rid of the filibuster for this,” Biden said.
Biden identified two bills in his speech: the John Lewis Voting Rights Act, which seeks to rectify a U.S. Supreme Court decision undermining the Voting Rights Act and the Freedom of the Vote Act, which would dramatically reform voting process, including the expansion of voting by mail and early voting.
Joining Biden in Atlanta in favor of changing rules to advance voting rights was Vice President Kamala Harris, who said “nowhere — nowhere — does the Constitution give a minority the right to unilaterally block legislation.”
“Over the past few years, we have seen so many anti-voter laws, that there is a danger of becoming accustomed to these laws, a danger of adjusting to these laws as though they are normal, a danger of becoming complacent, complicit,” Harris said. “Anti-voter laws are not new in our nation, but we must not be deceived into thinking they are normal.”
********************
President Biden and Vice President Harris deliver voting rights speech in Atlanta:
********************
Full text of the president’s remarks:
In our lives and the lives of our nation — the life of our nation, there are moments so stark that they divide all that came before from everything that followed. They stop time. They rip away the trivial from the essential. And they force us to confront hard truths about ourselves, about our institutions, and about our democracy.
In the words of Scripture, they remind us to “hate evil, love good, and establish justice in the gate.”
Last week, [Vice] President Harris and I stood in the United States Capitol to observe one of those “before and after” moments in American history: January 6th insurrection on the citadel of our democracy.
Today, we come to Atlanta — the cradle of civil rights — to make clear what must come after that dreadful day when a dagger was literally held at the throat of American democracy.
We stand on the grounds that connect Clark Atlanta — Atlanta University, Morehouse College, and near Spelman College — the home of generations of advocates, activists, educators and preachers; young people, just like the students here, who have done so much to build a better America.
We visited the sacred Ebenezer Baptist Church and paused to prayed at the crypt of Dr. and Mrs. King, and spent time with their family. And here in the district — as was pointed out — represented and reflected the life of beloved friend, John Lewis.
In their lifetimes, time stopped when a bomb blew up the 16th Street Baptist Church in Birmingham and murdered four little girls.They [Time] stopped when John and many others seeking justice were beaten and bloodied while crossing the bridge at Selma named after the Grand Dragon of the Ku Klux Klan.
They stopped — time stopped, and they forced the country to confront the hard truths and to act — to act to keep the promise of America alive: the promise that holds that we’re all created equal but, more importantly, deserve to be treated equally. And from those moments of darkness and despair came light and hope.
Democrats, Republicans, and independents worked to pass the historic Civil Rights Act and the voting rights legislation. And each successive generation continued that ongoing work.
But then the violent mob of January 6th, 2021, empowered and encouraged by a defeated former president, sought to win through violence what he had lost at the ballot box, to impose the will of the mob, to overturn a free and fair election, and, for the first time — the first time in American history, they — to stop the peaceful transfer of power.
They failed. They failed. (Applause.) But democracy’s — but democracy’s visi- — victory was not certain, nor is democracy’s future.
That’s why we’re here today to stand against the forces in America that value power over principle, forces that attempted a coup — a coup against the legally expressed will of the American people — by sowing doubt, inventing charges of fraud, and seeking to steal the 2020 election from the people.
They want chaos to reign. We want the people to rule.
But let me be clear: This is not about me or Vice President Harris or our party; it’s about all of us. It’s about the people. It’s about America.
Hear me plainly: The battle for the soul of America is not over. We must stand strong and stand together to make sure January 6th marks not the end of democracy but the beginning of a renaissance of our democracy.
You know, for the right to vote and to have that vote counted is democracy’s threshold liberty. Without it, nothing is possible, but with it, anything is possible.
But while the denial of fair and free elections is un-democratic, it is not unprecedented.
Black Americans were denied full citizenship and voting rights until 1965. Women were denied the right to vote until just 100 years ago. The United States Supreme Court, in recent years, has weakened the Voting Rights Act. And now the defeated former president and his supporters use the Big Lie about the 2020 election to fuel torrent and torment and anti-voting laws — new laws designed to suppress your vote, to subvert our elections.
Here in Georgia, for years, you’ve done the hard work of democracy: registering voters, educating voters, getting voters to the polls. You’ve built a broad coalition of voters: Black, white, Latino, Asian American, urban, suburban, rural, working class, and middle class.
And it’s worked: You’ve changed the state by bringing more people, legally, to the polls. That’s how you won the historic elections of Senator Raphael Warnock and Senator Jon Ossoff.
You did it — you did it the right way, the democratic way.
And what’s been the reaction of Republicans in Georgia? Choose the wrong way, the undemocratic way. To them, too many people voting in a democracy is a problem. So they’re putting up obstacles.
For example, voting by mail is a safe and convenient way to get more people to vote, so they’re making it harder for you to vote by mail.
The same way, I might add, in the 2020 Election, President Trump voted from behind the desk in the White House — in Florida.
Dropping your ballots off to secure drop boxes — it’s safe, it’s convenient, and you get more people to vote. So they’re limiting the number of drop boxes and the hours you can use them.
Taking away the options has a predictable effect: longer lines at the polls, lines that can last for hours. You’ve seen it with your own eyes. People get tired and they get hungry.
When the Bible teaches us to feed the hungry and give water to the thirsty, the new Georgia law actually makes it illegal — think of this — I mean, it’s 2020, and now ’22, going into that election — it makes it illegal to bring your neighbors, your fellow voters food or water while they wait in line to vote. What in the hell — heck are we talking about?
I mean, think about it. (Applause.) That’s not America. That’s what it looks like when they suppress the right to vote.
And here’s how they plan to subvert the election: The Georgia Republican Party, the state legislature has now given itself the power to make it easier for partisan actors — their cronies — to remove local election officials.
Think about that. What happened in the last election? The former president and allies pursued, threatened, and intimidated state and local election officials.
Election workers — ordinary citizens — were subject to death threats, menacing phone calls, people stalking them in their homes.
Remember what the defeated former president said to the highest-ranking election official — a Republican — in this state? He said, quote, “I just want to find 11,780 votes.”
Pray God. He didn’t say that part.
He didn’t say, “Count the votes.” He said, “find votes” that he needed to win.
He failed because of the courageous officials — Democrats, Republicans — who did their duty and upheld the law.
But with this new law in Georgia, his loyal- — his loyalists will be placed in charge of state elections. What is that going to mean? Well, the chances for chaos and subversion are even greater as partisans seek the result they want — no matter what the voters have said, no matter what the count. The votes of nearly 5 million Georgians will be up for grabs if that law holds.
It’s not just here in Georgia. Last year alone, 19 states not proposed but enacted 34 laws attacking voting rights. There were nearly 400 additional bills Republican members of state legislatures tried to pass. And now, Republican legislators in several states have already announced plans to escalate the onslaught this year.
Their endgame? To turn the will of the voters into a mere suggestion — something states can respect or ignore.
Jim Crow 2.0 is about two insidious things: voter suppression and election subversion. It’s no longer about who gets to vote; it’s about making it harder to vote. It’s about who gets to count the vote and whether your vote counts at all.
It’s not hyperbole; this is a fact.
Look, this matters to all of us. The goal of the former president and his allies is to disenfranchise anyone who votes against them. Simple as that. The facts won’t matter; your vote won’t matter. They’ll just decide what they want and then do it.
That’s the kind of power you see in totalitarian states, not in democracies.
We must be vigilant.
And the world is watching. I know the majority of the world leaders — the good and the bad ones, adversaries and allies alike. They’re watching American democracy and seeing whether we can meet this moment. And that’s not hyperbole.
When I showed up at the G7 with seven other world leaders — there were a total of nine present — Vice President Harris and I have spent our careers doing this work — I said, “America is back.” And the response was, “For how long?” “For how long?”
As someone who’s worked in foreign policy my whole life, I never thought I would ever hear our allies say something like that.
Over the past year, we’ve directed federal agencies to promote access to voting, led by the Vice President. We’ve appointed top civil rights advocates to help the U.S. Department of Justice, which has doubled its voting rights enforcement staff.
And today, we call on Congress to get done what history will judge: Pass the Freedom to Vote Act. Pass it now — which would prevent voter suppression so that here in Georgia there’s full access to voting by mail, there are enough drop boxes during enough hours so that you can bring food and water as well to people waiting in line.
The Freedom to Vote Act takes on election subversion to protect nonpartisan electors [election] officials, who are doing their job, from intimidation and interference.
It would get dark money out of politics, create fairer district maps and ending partisan gerrymandering.
Look, it’s also time to pass the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act.
I’ve been having these quiet conversations with the members of Congress for the last two months. I’m tired of being quiet!
Folks, it’ll restore the strength of the Voting Rights Act of ’65 — the one President Johnson signed after John Lewis was beaten, nearly killed on Bloody Sunday, only to have the Supreme Court weaken it multiple times over the past decade.
Restoring the Voting Rights Act would mean the Justice Department can stop discriminatory laws before they go into effect — before they go into effect.
The Vice President and I have supported voting rights bills since day one of this administration. But each and every time, Senate Republicans have blocked the way. Republicans oppose even debating the issue. You hear me?
I’ve been around the Senate a long time. I was Vice President for eight years. I’ve never seen a circumstance where not one single Republican has a voice that’s ready to speak for justice now.
When I was a senator, including when I headed up the Judiciary Committee, I helped reauthorize the Voting [Rights] Act three times. We held hearings. We debated. We voted. I was able to extend the Voting Rights Act for 25 years.
In 2006, the Voting Rights Act passed 390 to 33 in
the House of Representatives and 98 to 0 in the Senate with votes from 16 current sitting Republicans in this United States Senate. Sixteen of them voted to extend it.
The last year I was chairman, as some of my friends sitting down here will tell you, Strom Thurmond voted to extend the Voting Rights Act. Strom Thurmond.
But, folks, then it was signed into law, the last time, by President George W. Bush.
You know, when we got voting rights extended in the 1980s, as I’ve said, even Thurmond supported it. Think about that. The man who led the longest filibu- — one of the longest filibusters in history in the United States Senate in 1957 against the Voting Rights Act [Civil Rights Act]. The man who led and sided with the old Southern Bulls in the United States Senate to perpetuate segregation in this nation. Even Strom Thurmond came to support voting rights.
But Republicans today can’t and won’t. Not a single Republican has displayed the courage to stand up to a defeated president to protect America’s right to vote. Not one. Not one.
We have 50-50 in the United States Senate. That means we have 51 presidents. (Laughter.) You all think I’m kidding.
I’ve been pretty good at working with senators my whole career. But, man, when you got 51 presidents, it gets harder. Any one can change the outcome.
Sadly, the United States Senate — designed to be the world’s greatest deliberative body — has been rendered a shell of its former self. It gives me no satisfaction in saying that, as an institutionalist, as a man who was honored to serve in the Senate.
But as an institutionalist, I believe that the threat to
our democracy is so grave that we must find a way to pass these voting rights bills, debate them, vote.
Let the majority prevail. And if that bare minimum is blocked, we have no option but to change the Senate rules, including getting rid of the filibuster for this.
You know, last year, if I’m not mistaken, the filibuster was used 154 times. The filibuster has been used to generate compromise in the past and promote some bipartisanship. But it’s also been used to obstruct — including and especially obstruct civil rights and voting rights.
And when it was used, senators traditionally used to have to stand and speak at their desks for however long it took, and sometimes it took hours. And when they sat down, if no one immediately stood up, anyone could call for a vote or the debate ended.
But that doesn’t happen today. Senators no longer even have to speak one word. The filibuster is not used by Republicans to bring the Senate together but to pull it further apart.
The filibuster has been weaponized and abused.
While the state legislatures’ assault on voting rights is simple — all you need in your House and Senate is a pure majority — in the United States Senate, it takes a supermajority: 60 votes, even to get a vote — instead of 50 — to protect the right to vote.
State legislatures can pass anti-voting laws with simple majorities. If they can do that, then the United States Senate should be able to protect voting rights by a simple majority.
Today I’m making it clear: To protect our democracy, I support changing the Senate rules, whichever way they need to be changed — (applause) — to prevent a minority of senators from blocking action on voting rights.
When it comes to protecting majority rule in America, the majority should rule in the United States Senate.
I make this announcement with careful deliberation, recognizing the fundamental right to vote is the right from which all other rights flow.
And I make it with an appeal to my Republican colleagues, to those Republicans who believe in the rule of law: Restore the bipartisan tradition of voting rights.
The people who restored it, who abided by it in the past were Richard Nixon, Gerald Ford, Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush, George W. Bush. They all supported the Voting Rights Act.
Don’t let the Republican Party morph into something else. Restore the institution of the Senate the way it was designed to be.
Senate rules were just changed to raise the debt ceiling so we wouldn’t renege on our debt for the first time in our history and prevent an economic crisis. That was done by a simple majority.
As Senator Warnock said a few weeks ago in a powerful speech: If we change the rules to protect the full faith and credit of the United States, we should be able to change the rules to protect the heart and soul of our democracy. He was right.
In the days that followed John Lewis’s death, there was an outpouring of praise and support across the political spectrum.
But as we stand here today, it isn’t enough just to praise his memory. We must translate eulogy into action. We need to follow John Lewis’s footsteps. We need to support the bill in his name.
Just a few days ago, we talked about — up in the Congress and in the White House — the event coming up shortly to celebrate Dr. King’s birthday. And Americans of all stripes will praise him for the content of his character.
But as Dr. King’s family said before, it’s not enough to praise their father. They even said: On this holiday, don’t celebrate his birthday unless you’re willing to support what he lived for and what he died for. The next few days, when these bills come to a vote, will mark a turning point in this nation’s history.
We will choose — the issue is: Will we choose democracy over autocracy, light over shadows, justice over injustice?
I know where I stand. I will not yield. I will not flinch. I will defend the right to vote, our democracy against all enemies — foreign and, yes, domestic.
And the question is: Where will the institution of the United States Senate stand? Every senator — Democrat, Republican, and independent — will have to declare where they stand, not just for the moment, but for the ages.
Will you stand against voter suppression? Yes or no? That’s the question they’ll answer. Will you stand against election subversion? Yes or no? Will you stand for democracy? Yes or no?
And here’s one thing every senator and every American should remember: History has never been kind to those who have sided with voter suppression over voters’ rights. And it will be even less kind for those who side with election subversion.
So, I ask every elected official in America: How do you want to be remembered?
At consequential moments in history, they present a choice: Do you want to be the si- — on the side of Dr. King or George Wallace? Do you want to be on the side of John Lewis or Bull Connor? Do you want to be on the side of Abraham Lincoln or Jefferson Davis?
This is the moment to decide to defend our elections, to defend our democracy.
And if you do that, you will not be alone. That’s because the struggle to protect voting rights has never been borne by one group alone.
We saw Freedom Riders of every race. Leaders of every faith marching arm in arm. And, yes, Democrats and Republicans in Congress of the United States and in the presidency.
I did not live the struggle of Douglass, Tubman, King, Lewis, Goodman, Chaney, and Schwerner, and countless others — known and unknown.
I did not walk in the shoes of generations of students who walked these grounds. But I walked other grounds. Because I’m so damn old, I was there as well.
You think I’m kidding, man. It seems like yesterday the first time I got arrested. Anyway —
But their struggles here — they were the ones that opened my eyes as a high school student in the late — in the late ’50s and early ’60s. They got me more engaged in the work of my life.
And what we’re talking about today is rooted in the very idea of America — the idea that Annell Ponder, who graduated from Clark Atlanta, captured in a single word. She was a teacher and librarian who was also an unyielding champion of voting rights.
In 1963 — when I was just starting college at university — after registering voters in Mississippi, she was pulled off a bus, arrested, and jailed, where she was brutally beaten.
In her cell, next to her, was Fannie Lou Hamer, who described the beating this way, and I quote: “I could hear the sounds of [the] licks and [the] horrible screams…They beat her, I don’t know [for] how long. And after a while, she began to pray, and asked God to have mercy on those people.”
Annell Ponder’s friends visited her the next day. Her face was badly swollen. She could hardly talk.
But she managed to whi- — whisper one word: “Freedom.” “Freedom” — the only word she whispered.
After nearly 250 years since our founding, that singular idea still echoes. But it’s up to all of us to make sure it never fades, especially the students here — your generation that just started voting — as there are those who are trying to take away that vi- — vote you just started to be able to exercise.
But the giants we honor today were your age when they made clear who we must be as a nation. Not a joke. Think about it. In the early ’60s, they were sitting where you’re sitting. They were you. And like them, you give me much hope for the future.
Before and after in our lives — and in the life of the nation — democracy is who we are, who we must be — now and forever. So, let’s stand in this breach together. Let’s love good, establish justice in the gate.
And remember, as I said, there is one — this is one of those defining moments in American history: Each of those who vote will be remembered by class after class, in the ’50s and ’60s — the 2050s and ’60s. Each one of the members of the Senate is going to be judged by history on where they stood before the vote and where they stood after the vote.
There’s no escape. So, let’s get back to work.
As my fath- — my grandfather Finnegan used to say every time I walked out the door in Scranton, he’d say, “Joey, keep the faith.” Then he’d say, “No, Joey, spread it.”
Let’s spread the faith and get this done.
May God bless you all. And may God protect the sacred right to vote. Thank you. I mean it. Let’s go get this done. Thank you.
Politics
Former council member John Duran is running for one last term
Duran said his years of experience are needed
Long-time West Hollywood resident and activist John Duran surprised many by announcing he was running again for West Hollywood City Council in the upcoming general election.
“I’m only doing this because I think it is absolutely necessary for the city’s health to have one person with some experience on the council,” Duran told the Los Angeles Blade. “I really think the city is heading in the wrong direction and is on the wrong track.”
Duran has a long history of advocacy for the LGBTQ+ community and was one of the founders of Equality California. He is known around the city and in his political career as having defended LGBTQ+ rights during 40 years of his legal career, including being an attorney for ACT UP during the AIDS epidemic, and was the statewide co-chair of the Life AIDS lobby when laws on HIV and AIDS were being made in the 80s.
Duran served on the West Hollywood City Council for two decades, starting from 2001, and passed on his mayoral seat in March 2019 after multiple sexual harassment allegations were made about Duran by past and current members of the Gay Men’s Chorus. Duran cited a health issue as his reason for stepping down as mayor.
In February 2019, Duran left his board position within the Gay Men’s Chorus, claiming his departure was planned before these accusations came to light.
An investigation into the allegations, published by the Los Angeles Times, included claims that Duran made inappropriate remarks and put his hand down two men’s waistbands. At the time, protestors and media scrutiny demanded his resignation from the council; after stepping down as mayor, Duran served the rest of his term as a city council member until Nov. 2020.
Prior to these accusations, in 2016, an aide received a $500,000 settlement from a sexual harassment suit against the City of West Hollywood and Duran. Neither Duran nor the city admitted wrongdoing in the settlement or suit.
In the six years since his last term, Duran said he’s enjoyed his privacy but is ready to get back to work for one last term.
He’s only eligible for another four years, so he feels he can use his expertise to get the council on better footing for long-term success.
“A lot of the votes right now are three to two, with the two people with lots of experience in the minority, and I think that produces some threats to the city in terms of growth, economic growth, housing development, and transportation,” Duran said. “All of the nuts and bolts of the city are under threat.”
Some issues he says he’s been frustrated seeing the council voting on are affordability and increasing safety along Fountain Ave.
“I think affordability is a big issue, and one of the issues that I disagree with the current council majority on is the issue about affordable housing and what to do about it,” Duran said.
The strongest tool for affordable housing? Duran says it’s rent control.
“We cannot build our way out of this (lack of affordability) issue,” Duran said. “What’s happening now is the incentive to try to build more is resulting in the destruction of rent-controlled units, and so the net effect is we’re going backwards by tearing down rent-controlled apartment buildings.”
Long-term, he hopes to see the council continue to strengthen rent control and follow up on earthquake retrofitting that Duran says was “largely abandoned” since he left the council.
Issues Duran hopes to tackle if he’s voted in for his last four-year term include “boring” everyday policies and issues to improve within municipal government.
“There are too many unfunded capital projects in the city’s budget, like well over 50,” Duran said.
Focusing on boring things like this can help fund future projects for the city long-term, he said.
“We need to look at our capital improvement projects and figure out which ones have to be cut, so we can put those unfunded projects back into our prudent reserves and really focus on how we’re going to use our prudent reserves.”
With so many capital improvement projects sitting in the pipeline, Duran said many of them are not being built due to economic shifts post-pandemic.
Another aspect he’d like to focus on improving if he gets voted back onto the city council is leadership development, especially for older council members, in cultivating younger LGBTQ+ leaders.
“I think a lot of the younger people that I see that are now running are inspired by being anti-Trump. I totally get that; I am too,” Duran said. “But really, what we have to start thinking about in terms of West Hollywood governance is the way that technology, artificial intelligence, and robotics are reshaping the world around us.”
“To me, those are the kind of conversations that need to happen for the future planning of West Hollywood,” he added. “I know I’m only going to be part of the launching of these conversations.”
Overall, Duran hopes that the spirit of West Hollywood, its defiant origins, and important LGBTQ+ history remain and shape the future of West Hollywood.
“I’ve been coming here to West Hollywood since the 70s, when they said we were mentally ill and I got to watch the whole history of the LGBT community from my front doorstep,” Duran said. “I think it’s worth having at least one person on the council who’s got a sense of where we came from and helping direct where we need to go.”
That Duran has “no interest” in running for higher office in Sacramento or D.C. is a plus for voters, he said.
“I don’t want to see West Hollywood become like the rest of Los Angeles,” Duran said. “That would be so heartbreaking to think that we’re going to become just like Brentwood, Westwood, Hollywood. We’re not; we’re something unique, completely different.”
Congress
EXCLUSIVE: Pressley rips State Department over LGBTQ+ rights rollbacks abroad
Massachusetts Democrat sent letter to Marco Rubio on Tuesday
Massachusetts Congresswoman Ayanna Pressley sent a letter to Secretary of State Marco Rubio urging the Trump-Vance administration to take urgent action to defend LGBTQ+ people across the globe; including in countries that are violating international human rights protections for LGBTQ+ individuals, putting at risk the safety of civilians and U.S. citizens working, living, and traveling abroad.
The letter, which the Los Angeles Blade got an exclusive preview of prior to it’s sending, criticizes the Trump-Vance administration’s foreign policy direction at the State Department, arguing that it has moved to roll back LGBTQ+ protections that have long been part of the U.S.’s global human rights posture.
“Criminalizing LGBTQI+ individuals undermines democracy globally, as well as U.S. national security. Thus, we urge the State Department to take adequate measures to speak out against this criminalization and protect U.S. citizens abroad, including your staff, who may be detained or harmed under such laws, policies, and practices,” Pressley, a Democrat who represents roughly three-fourths of Boston and much of the city’s suburbs, said. “U.S. civilians, diplomatic personnel, military members, and nonprofit workers on the ground providing health care and disaster support will be affected and have their safety threatened if the U.S. does not take action. Even U.S. citizens perceived as being part of the LGBTQI+ community and traveling or living in those countries may be used as bargaining chips. This is a serious U.S. national security concern.”
In the letter, Pressley underscores what she describes as a global escalation in criminalization and violence against LGBTQ+ people, noting that one-third of countries still criminalize consensual same-sex sexual relationships and that 12 countries impose the death penalty. She argues that these conditions make LGBTQ+ travelers, diplomats, and aid workers particularly vulnerable, and calls on the State Department to reassert U.S. leadership in defending human rights abroad.
“Every person deserves to live authentically, yet several countries are violating international human rights laws that protect LGBTQI+ individuals,” she said. “One-third of countries around the world criminalize same-sex consensual acts between adults, and 12 countries allow LGBTQI+ people to be executed for being themselves.”
She also invokes the U.S. has played in promoting democratic values internationally, arguing that LGBTQ+ rights should remain central to that mission.
“Historically, the United States has played a critical diplomatic role in promoting democracy and freedom for all individuals, including LGBTQI+ persons. The U.S. should be a world leader promoting human rights domestically and globally.”
In a separate statement included in the letter, Pressley emphasized both the moral and national security implications of the issue, warning that rising anti-LGBTQ+ laws abroad are endangering lives and require a coordinated U.S. response.
“Every person deserves to show up as their true, authentic selves here in the United States and in countries across the globe — and that includes our LGBTQI+ community members,” she said.
“However, we are witnessing a deeply concerning rise in human rights violations and criminalization of LGBTQI+ individuals in other countries, endangering the lives of civilians and U.S. citizens. It is incumbent upon the United States to protect our LGBTQI+ siblings at home and abroad not only for our national security but for the safety and freedom of LGBTQI+ people everywhere.”
The letter goes on to press the State Department for concrete action, including a public reaffirmation of U.S. commitments to LGBTQ+ human rights, the restoration of LGBTQ+ analysis in annual country reports, and clearer guidance for Americans traveling abroad. It also seeks clarity on whether the department is tracking cases of U.S. citizens detained or harmed under anti-LGBTQ+ laws and what proactive steps are being taken to warn and protect LGBTQ+ travelers.
While she is not a member of the Foreign Affairs Committee, Pressley remains highly active in international affairs and global policy.
While the letter focuses on current policy, it also lands in the broader context of Secretary of State Marco Rubio’s long record on LGBTQ+ issues. Rubio, a former senator from Florida, has consistently opposed same-sex marriage, calling the federal Respect for Marriage Act, which he voted against, a “stupid waste of time.” He has also expressed support for efforts to overturn Obergefell v. Hodges, the U.S. Supreme Court decision that legalized same-sex marriage nationwide.
During his time in the U.S. Senate and as a Florida political leader, Rubio has a long anti-LGBTQ+ track record. He defended state policies that LGBTQ+ advocates say target queer and transgender people, including Florida’s Parental Rights in Education law — commonly known by critics as “Don’t Say Gay” or “Don’t Say Trans” — which restricts classroom discussion of sexual orientation and gender identity.
He has also drawn criticism for his voting record, including a 0/100 score from the Human Rights Campaign’s Congressional Scorecard, reflecting opposition to expanding federal civil rights protections for LGBTQ+ people and for opposing adoption rights for same-sex couples.
Now serving as secretary of state, Rubio has overseen changes at the State Department that LGBTQ+ advocates say have reduced visibility and protections for transgender people, including the removal of trans-specific references from parts of the department’s public-facing materials and travel guidance. He has also been linked to broader restructuring efforts involving U.S. foreign assistance programs, including the U.S. Agency for International Development, which has historically supported global HIV prevention and LGBTQ+ rights initiatives in regions such as sub-Saharan Africa, Central Asia, and Latin America.
Those cuts and shifts, critics argue, have weakened programs like PEPFAR — credited with saving millions of lives worldwide — and reduced U.S. support for LGBTQ+ communities facing persecution abroad. The program is credited with saving at least 25 million lives.
Pressley’s own record stands in contrast, with a 100/100 on HRC’s Congressional Scorecard and a long history of legislative and advocacy work centered on LGBTQ+ equality. In recent years, she has secured federal funding for The Pryde, an affordable housing development for LGBTQ+ seniors in Boston, and has repeatedly pushed for expanded civil rights protections, including support for the Equality Act and the Equal Rights Amendment.
She has also advanced policy efforts aimed at LGBTQ+ survivors of violence, trans, and nonbinary individuals navigating credit and legal systems, and broader protections under housing and civil rights law — framing her work as part of a sustained effort to ensure LGBTQ+ people are included in federal policy at every level.
Politics
California State Senator Scott Wiener slammed during Trans Pride over his stance on Gaza
Over the weekend, California State Senator Scott Wiener was confronted by a group of around seven people while attending a Trans Pride event in San Francisco on Friday, June 26.
A video posted on X by user Dimitry Yakoushkin of the incident went viral, showing Wiener being chased out of Dolores Park, while the group screamed at him. Multiple people in the protest group were wearing black ski masks that concealed their identities.
Wiener is contending to take over Nancy Pelosi’s seat in Congress in the upcoming November general election.
The video started off with Yakoushkin, a local activist, highlighting how great Wiener’s LGBT+ policies and lawmaking work are. As Yakoushkin started to criticize Wiener about his housing policies, others started to gather around the politician.
Yakoushkin and the group quickly transitioned to yelling at him about his stance on the genocide in Gaza.
“You’ve been wonderful for trans people, and… you’ve been terrible on Gaza,” Yakoushkin is heard saying in the video. “You do not belong here (at Trans Pride) anymore, Scott.”
“I want to support someone who’s so positive on trans rights, but you’re a piece of sh*t on Gaza,” he says later in the video. “How could you do that?”
Other protestors shouted obscenities that were hard to distinguish from, but some that jumped out included cries of “f*ck you” and “You’re a piece of sh*t.”
When it was clear this would not be a one-and-done criticism, Wiener is seen on video pivoting to exit Dolores Park, with the group following behind until Wiener was out of the park.
The video garnered over 12 million views as of Monday, June 29.
Scott Wiener showed up to the trans march and for the first time we kicked his ass out. It's sad because while he's written some good legislation for queers, hes ultimately a genocidal-supporting center right shill. Trigger warning: broken man walking away defeated. Vote Connie! pic.twitter.com/TXIB7omxde
— Dimitry Yakoushkin (@decadimitry) June 27, 2026
In early January of this year, Wiener declined to call Israel’s actions in Gaza a genocide during a congressional debate forum, as many other politicians have.
A week later, on Jan. 11, Wiener reversed that decision.
“For years, I’ve condemned (Prime Minister of Israel Benjamin) Netanyahu and his extremist government and the devastation they’ve inflicted on Gaza,” Wiener posted on X. “It’s why I’ve been clear I won’t support U.S. funding for the destruction of Palestinian communities. I’ve stopped short of calling it genocide, but I can’t anymore.”
This was after two years of Israeli bombing that led to thousands of Palestinian deaths in the Gaza Strip, following the Oct. 7 attack by Hamas.
After Friday’s incident, Wiener posted a statement, calling it “physical intimidation and harassment” by “people who had previously targeted” him with “aggressive behavior in the past.”
“Last night I attended the Trans March, as I’ve done each year for the past 22 years since the first march in 2004,” the statement said. “I attend each year in solidarity with our trans siblings, who are facing existential threats from right-wing extremists, including the President.”
“I have no objection whatsoever to anyone disagreeing with me, opposing me, or protesting me.
All of that is core to democracy,” the statement continued. “I also have no issue when people talk to me on the street and ask questions or express opposition. That’s democracy, even when the people engaging in this conduct misrepresent my views. But when opposition and disagreement transition to harassment, including cornering me, touching me, or trying to physically bully me out of a public event, that crosses a line.”
Wiener’s congressional opponent, Supervisor Connie Chan, appeared to march without any incident.
Many critics of Wiener took to social media to point out that Wiener posted this statement and used it as a fundraising opportunity, while not posting about the heavy police presence and arrests during San Francisco’s Pride weekend.
Independent journalist Jersey Noah made an Instagram post to Wiener saying, “What do you have to say about (San Francisco Police Department) assaulting and arresting trans people on the public streets of San Francisco for two consecutive nights? Because you haven’t said a… word.”
This is not the first time a politician has been ousted from San Francisco’s Trans Pride festivities, according to San Francisco-based outlet Mission Local.
Past politicians forced to leave over the last decade include Mayor Daniel Lurie, then-Mayor Ed Lee, City Attorney David Chiu, and then-State Senator Mark Leno, according to Mission Local.
Yakoushkin said the protest was spontaneous, saying, “It was not planned, I was walking home, and I saw him from a distance and I got my camera out to start filming,” according to Mission Local.
The California Senate Democratic Caucus and California LGBTQ+ Caucus made a joint statement of support for Wiener, denouncing the verbal harassment toward Wiener as “unacceptable.”
“Senator Wiener has spent the last 16 years in service to San Francisco,” their statement said. “In that time, he has been a fearless champion for the LGBTQ+ community even when it was not politically popular, leading on landmark legislation advancing the rights and protections for Transgender, Gender Expansive, and Intersex people. He is a steadfast advocate for his communities.
“In California, we believe everyone deserves dignity and respect, regardless of political differences,” the statement continued.
California Politics
From the desk of Equality California: The latest political developments in CA and D.C.
With the 2026 midterm elections on the horizon, there’s a lot to do to protect our progress and advance equality.
Pride Month may be over, but that doesn’t mean there aren’t still plenty of opportunities to Rise Up with Equality California throughout the remainder of 2026. While a few Pride celebrations are still ahead — we’re looking at you, San Diego and Palm Springs — our work is far from finished. With the 2026 midterm elections on the horizon, there’s a lot to do to protect our progress and advance equality.
For all things Pride 2026, visit our EQCA x Pride page.
To read more stories, join our mailing list, and sign up for the weekly Equality Brief, visit eqca.org/equalitybrief.
- ELECTION UPDATE: Pro-Equality Candidates Win Big in the California Primary
Equality California’s endorsed pro-equality slate of candidates largely succeeded in their primary races and will proceed to the November midterm elections. Among the most important victories were out LGBTQ+ candidates Scott Wiener (CA-11) and Marni von Wilpert (CA-48), the former looking to succeed Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi, the latter to flip a long-held seat from red to blue with the retirement of Rep. Darrell Issa. Sec. Xavier Becerra, EQCA’s endorsed candidate for governor, also emerged as the top vote-getter in that contest and will proceed to November where he will face anti-LGBTQ+ MAGA Republican Steve Hilton. At the state level, out LGBTQ+ candidates Annalisa Perea (AD-31), Clarissa Cervantes (AD-58), and John Erickson (SD-24) will also move forward to the midterms, where their wins would grow the numbers of the California Legislative LGBTQ Caucus. Visit EQCA.org/elections for more information on all our candidates! - Equality California Priorities Included in Initial 2026-27 Legislative Budget Agreement:
California Speaker of the Assembly Robert Rivas and Senate President pro Tempore Monique Límon announced they had reached an agreement on the state’s 2026-27 budget. Equality California and a coalition of LGBTQ+, healthcare, and civil rights groups had submitted a $26 million budget request to create an in-state network for transition-related care and strengthen existing provider networks in the event that the federal government moves to not offer Medicare or Medicaid coverage for said care. The budget was subsequently approved by the full legislature and now heads to Governor Gavin Newsom for his signature. Equality California, our coalition partners, and legislative allies are optimistic that the governor will recognize the importance of a pro-equality budget and sign it into law, particularly as the federal government continues to target California and undermine protections for LGBTQ+ people. - Equality California’s Lauren Cazares Honored at Pride Month Legislative Celebration:
Cazares, who serves as EQCA’s Associate Director of Political Affairs and is the current Vice Mayor of the City of La Mesa, was recognized alongside a dozen other individuals as part of the California Legislative LGBTQ Caucus’ Pride Month Celebration. The Caucus recognizes a select group of community members, local leaders, and public figures each June for their efforts in helping to advance representation, as well as for being an inspiration to the LGBTQ+ community and its allies. Previous honorees include Equality California Executive Director Tony Hoang and recent San Diego Equality Awards emcee, entertainer Paris Antoinette Quion. - Anti-Trans Sports Ballot Initiative Withdrawn in Nevada:
Nevada Governor Joe Lombardo announced he was withdrawing a proposed ballot initiative that would ban transgender girls from playing sports. Following the Nevada Supreme Court clearing the way for the ballot initiative to proceed, Lombardo and his far-right allies cited a lack of support and necessary signatures to qualify for the November 2026 ballot. However, Lombardo has said that should he be reelected, he would seek to address the issue during the state’s 2027 Legislative Session. - Kansas Judge Blocks Law Criminalizing Transgender Youth Healthcare:
Douglas County District Judge Carl Folsom issued an injunction temporarily blocking a law criminalizing the provision of transition-related care for youth from going into effect. While this does not strike down the law outright, it does prevent enforcement while legal challenges remain pending. The Kansas legislature overrode Governor Laura Kelly’s veto of the legislation in 2025, which blocks access to puberty blockers, hormone therapy, and transition-related surgeries for minors, and has been decried as one of the most expansive bans on transgender health care in the country. - Appeals Court: HIV+ People Who Meet Qualifications Can Serve in the Armed Forces:
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit issued an order lifting a stay banning the enlistment of HIV+ people in the military, pending further legal action. The Court’s order clarified that the stay was lifted upon its agreement to rehear the case of Wilkins v Hegseth in an en banc hearing, before the full panel of Justices. The court vacated a February panel decision upholding the military’s HIV enlistment restrictions; arguments in the case are tentatively scheduled for September. - D.C. Federal Appeals Court Rules Transgender Military Ban Illegal
The US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia issued a 2-1 ruling on finding that the Pentagon — under Secretary Pete Hegseth’s leadership and in response to a Trump executive order — illegally barred transgender troops from military service. While the ban has been in effect following a Supreme Court ruling allowing it to proceed pending litigation, the panel’s new ruling keeps the military from kicking out current servicemembers named in the lawsuit; new recruits, however, will still not be allowed to join. - Trump Department of Veterans Affairs Moves to Eliminate Programs for LGBTQ+ Vets:
A June 12 directive signed by Veterans Health Administration Under Secretary for Health John J. Bartrum orders health facilities nationwide to eliminate “gender identity-based initiatives” and strip LGBTQ+ designations from health provider networks. This comes as part of a greater move by the Trump administration to remove references to gender identity and sexual orientation in federal programs. Already, staff at VA providers have expressed concerns that programming and services uniquely designed for LGBTQ+ veterans — who face higher rates of depression, suicidal ideation, food insecurity, and housing instability — could be terminated. - Federal Court Blocks Anti-Trans Idaho Bathroom Law:
U.S. District Judge Amanda K. Brailsford issued a 30-page decision Tuesday granting a preliminary injunction against Idaho’s HB 752, the most extreme anti-transgender bathroom ban in the country. Judge Brailsford’s ruling concluded that the questions and mechanisms around the law’s enforcement are so unclear that they likely violate the Constitution’s due process guarantee. In addition to blocking enforcement of the law, Judge Brailsford extended the class of people that the injunction applies to beyond the plaintiffs, which will temporarily protect all transgender people statewide while litigation proceeds. - Ariana Grande Launches Foundation, Including Focuses on LGBTQ+, Trans Rights:
On the heels of kicking off her Eternal Sunshine Tour in Oakland, pop icon and actress Ariana Grande has announced the launch of the Brighter Days Ahead Foundation, composed of four different funds that will support, among other causes, LGBTQ+ and transgender civil rights, reproductive justice, and mental health advocacy. “Our mission is to support, protect, and provide resources for our vulnerable friends in need,” Grande stated. “We will be supporting handfuls of incredible organizations that provide the safe space and care that is desperately needed by so many right now.”
STATE LEGISLATIVE UPDATE
11 of 12 Equality California-sponsored and supported bills are still alive this legislative session, and continue to make their way through policy committees. We are thankful to the Legislative LGBTQ Caucus and our other partners in Sacramento for helping move our bills along and secure critical votes.
To view our entire 2026 state legislative package, visit eqca.org/legislation
UPCOMING EVENTS
Want to join Equality California at an upcoming Pride festival, or march alongside us in a parade? Visit our Mobilize page to see all the remaining Pride events we’re a part of!
We’ve also got one Pride Party left this summer! Rise Up and join us at an event near you. Tickets are on sale now!
|San Diego: Tuesday, July 14 @ InsideOUT, 6:00-9:00 PM
Politics
How Helen Krieger plans to fight for West Hollywood
This City Council hopeful is done letting WeHo residents slip through the cracks.
Amidst the nonstop stream of vitriol that American politics has become, it’s easy for LA residents to forget about the importance of local elections.
These are the elections that won’t receive national attention but will decide if you’ll be able to make rent in the next few months. Or if you’ll be able to rely on public transit, or find work within the city, or dozens of other essential ways that electing someone who truly understands your needs would impact someone in Los Angeles today. Local elections are key to making cities like ours livable for all, and especially in communities like West Hollywood, it’s important that the queer people who truly know their neighbors are the ones running to represent them.
It’s a task that not everyone is up to. But for candidate Helen Krieger, the decision to launch her campaign for West Hollywood City Council was one of the easiest this WeHo local has ever made.
“I learned that once things fall apart, it’s so much harder to put them back together,” said Krieger, when she spoke with the Blade about her campaign. “It can be so hard to get people’s buy-in because they don’t trust you anymore as city officials…or as leaders.” It’s an unfortunate truth that Helen learned firsthand; she moved to West Hollywood ten years ago after living in New Orleans, where she banded together with other residents in the midst of the Hurricane Katrina crisis. Helen described the terror of this natural disaster and how deeply the city officials failed residents in its aftermath. After months of mishandled projects that left hundreds of people homeless, it was her work with local advocates that eventually created affordable housing for these displaced residents.
This work saved countless locals and taught Helen a valuable lesson: “I learned [how] to bring everyone in, and [the value of] listening to everyone.”
Krieger’s eventual move to West Hollywood was inspired not only by her career — she’s a professional television writer — but also by the search for a community where she could be comfortable in her bisexual identity. Throughout the interview, she fondly remembered how accepted she’s always felt by other WeHo residents…but also how quickly she learned about the many ways this area fails to support locals.
Whether it’s rundown streets or horrific rent practices, while she has a deep love for West Hollywood, Helen has identified many of the ways that this city can be improved. It’s what drove her to join numerous local organizations like the West Hollywood Bike Coalition and the West Hollywood Dems Club, with her membership with these groups helping her better understand the needs of other WeHo residents. Along with these, Helen would eventually enter the tenuous arena that she would eventually campaign to have her own seat within: the West Hollywood City Council.
“Whenever I’m at city council [meeting], I’m often not going up to speak,” Krieger explained. “But I keep track of every speaker and what they’re saying, what are the comments that are being made — because not everyone can make it there! It’s a weeknight, it starts at 6 pm…if you have a job to go to in the morning, if you have young kids that you have to put to bed, you just can’t make it to that. So I also try to make space for people to give comments who aren’t there, and try to have conversations with them.”
Helen has made it common practice to not only provide rundowns of city council meetings for those who aren’t in attendance but also deliver comments on their behalf, calling out how just because these meetings have an inopportune schedule doesn’t mean local residents deserve to go unheard. This led to her connecting with even more West Hollywood residents and learning about the many issues they wanted addressed by their local government. This, when compounded with her own ideas for improvement, made it clear to Helen that she needed to join the City Council herself and make sure these problems were being solved.
“I am really pro-housing,” began Krieger, when detailing her campaign’s priorities. “I am really pro-complete streets — streets that should be built for all kinds of people, whether you’re walking, using a wheelchair, or driving a car, [the streets] need to be able to get you there. I think we need to build more houses and build more [affordable] housing units…[I’m pro] not doing stuff that we don’t need to, like making people and bike lanes unsafe. And let’s do stuff that will [actually help].”
These are just a few of the priorities that Helen spoke passionately about in her interview, with the City Council hopeful also describing her plans to bring Hollywood jobs back into the city, implement eco-friendly practices around the city, and develop new ways for the City Council to remain transparent with locals about how their taxes are being used. She stressed that these priorities are based not just on her own observations but are informed by what she’s learned from the other residents around her. She spoke passionately about talks with other community leaders, homeless individuals, and hundreds of others, with each conversation shaping the plans she hopes to implement if elected.
“There are some ways that people can slip through the cracks in the city, and so I want to just do what I can to [stop that,]” said Helen, when discussing why it’s time for her to join the West Hollywood City Council. “I want to make sure these gaps are being filled and that we weren’t getting too complacent in how we do things…I want to hear [people’s] concerns, and learn how we can address them moving forward.”
We’re still a few months away from the election, so it’s unclear if Helen Krieger will be able to win her seat and make these plans a reality. But no matter what happens with her campaign, one thing is for sure: if we had more politicians who were as focused on community building and truly listening to their residents as she is, then LA today would be a much better place for us all.
For more information, head to Helen4Weho.org.
Politics
Buttigieg says false police report temporarily separated him from his children
Michigan State Police corroborated his account
Former Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg on Friday recounted being separated from his children following an anonymous false police report.
The openly gay former mayor of South Bend, Ind., and current 2028 presidential contender was accused of posing a danger to his children and was not allowed to be with his four-year-old twins until after interviews were conducted.
Buttigieg went public with this account on his Substack, sharing how a woman anonymously — and falsely — accused him of posing a danger to his children.
“The caller said that he had spoken to a woman who claimed to have met me at a conference several years ago in Alabama, where she said I told her that I had committed unspeakable violent crimes, and the caller believed my children were still at risk,” Buttigieg wrote in a post he titled “A Terrible Thing Happened to My Family.” “I am a reasonable man. I try to keep as calm and low-key as possible. But I cannot describe the mix of rage and sadness that I feel at the idea that someone brought our children into this.”
Michigan State Police spoke to the BBC following Buttigieg sharing his story.
“The Michigan State Police and Child Protective Services responded and determined the report was false.”
The statement also went on to explain that these types of false reports were “dangerous” and divert “workers from responding to legitimate emergencies and protecting vulnerable children and families.”
In that post recounting the ordeal, Buttigieg continued, saying that it was “among the darkest hours of my life,” and pointed out that his children should not be subjected to this type of harassment as a circumstance of his own place in the national political spotlight.
“They are four years old. Four. They do not know or care what a Democrat or a Republican is.”
He finished his post:
“We cannot let American politics keep going in this direction. And we must not all go on as if it’s acceptable for this kind of thing to be part of the cost of entering public service.”
“Most importantly, Chasten and I will continue to pour ourselves into the joyful and demanding work of raising and educating our two children. Being their parents is the best thing in our lives. They are just children, kids who deserve the best upbringing that their parents can provide, who mean more to us than anything, whom we love beyond words and will do anything to protect, and whose right to a safe and happy childhood deserves absolute and unconditional respect.”
In response to the story Buttigieg shared on his Substack, Kelley Robinson, president of the Human Rights Campaign, released the following statement:
“I know how I would feel if someone tried to come between me and my kids. This is truly bottom-of-the-barrel stuff. It takes an awful, hateful person to question someone’s fitness as a parent just because of who they are, who they love, or in Sec. Buttigieg’s case, perhaps even who he speaks out against politically. We’re thinking of Pete, Chasten, and their whole family in this moment — and we aren’t resting until all LGBTQ+ families have the kind of safety and justice every one of us deserves.”
Buttigieg was transportation secretary during the Biden-Harris administration.
The Los Angeles Blade reached out to Michigan State Police to ask if any disciplinary actions would be imposed on the woman who made the false report, but did not hear back by the time of publication.
Federal Government
Trump holds housing bill hostage to anti-trans SAVE Act
President’s SAVE Act failed in the Senate
President Donald Trump is refusing to sign a new bipartisan housing bill unless his SAVE Act is approved by the legislative branch.
The bill being prevented from being enacted into law is the “21st Century ROAD to Housing Act.” The legislation is an attempt by Congress to make buying a home in the U.S. Senate more affordable in response to various factors — including housing shortages and regulatory constraints — that have made homeownership increasingly difficult. The total number of homeowners has nearly stopped growing, with high interest rates and surging home prices pushing more Americans toward renting.
The housing bill was considered highly bipartisan, something that is rare in this Congress. The House voted to pass the bill 358-32 on Tuesday after the Senate approved the measure 85-5 a day earlier. The legislation was led by U.S. Sens. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Tim Scott (R-S.C.) in the Senate and U.S. Reps. Maxine Waters (D-Calif.) and French Hill (R-Ark.) in the U.S. House of Representatives.
Some of the highlights of the legislation are aimed at increasing the supply of affordable housing while making homeownership more accessible. The bill would streamline environmental reviews and direct the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development to provide guidance to communities on reforming zoning and land-use policies that can create barriers to housing development.
The legislation would also expand the definition of “manufactured housing,” making it cheaper and easier to mass-produce homes built in factories before being transported to their sites. To encourage additional development, the bill would provide grants and loans for the construction of new housing, the rehabilitation of aging properties, and the conversion of vacant buildings into residential units. It would also increase certain banks’ Public Welfare Investment cap, allowing them to direct more capital toward low-income and affordable housing projects.
In an effort to help more Americans purchase homes, the legislation would create a program to expand access to small-dollar mortgages, which are often used to finance lower-cost homes, while also seeking to improve housing opportunities for veterans. The bill would further promote homeownership by limiting the number of single-family homes that large institutional investors can own and requiring them to disclose how many such properties they control, a measure intended to prioritize American families over corporate buyers.
The bill the president wants enacted — the SAVE Act — is a restrictive and anti-transgender piece of proposed legislation.
The bill would impose a number of new limitations on voter registration across the country by amending the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 to require in-person proof of citizenship for anyone seeking to vote in U.S. elections. The bill would also limit acceptable forms of identification to documents such as a birth certificate or passport — records that the Brennan Center for Justice estimates more than 21 million Americans do not possess — effectively restricting access to the ballot. It would also ban online voter registration, DMV voter registration efforts, and mail-in voter registration.
Trump pushed for the SAVE Act to include a provision that would ban gender-affirming medical care for trans minors, even with parental consent, and prohibit trans people from participating in school or professional sports consistent with their gender identity rather than their sex assigned at birth.
Trump also pressed Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) to eliminate the filibuster so the Republican-controlled Congress could pass the SAVE Act, saying Republicans will never win another election without it.
It is expected that Congress will override the president’s veto and pass the 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act, as it requires a two-thirds supermajority vote in both the House of Representatives and the Senate — a threshold the legislation currently exceeds.
It is not expected that the SAVE Act will pass the Senate in its current form. It passed the House, but every Democrat and four Republicans voted against it in the Senate.
Politics
LGBTQ+ political candidates see surge in threats, harassment: report
Majority fear physical attack, discouraging them from running
A new study reveals that LGBTQ+ candidates running for public office are seeing an unprecedented amount of harassment and threats as President Donald Trump and his far-right MAGA supporters continue to strip protections for minority groups at all levels of government.
The LGBTQ+ Victory Institute, the nation’s largest LGBTQ+ candidate training and leadership organization, recently partnered with Loyola Marymount University to collect data on the rising political violence experienced by LGBTQ+ candidates. The organization is closely affiliated with the LGBTQ+ Victory Fund, its sister political action arm dedicated to helping LGBTQ+ candidates get elected.
The Los Angeles Blade sat down with Evan Low, president and CEO of the LGBTQ+ Victory Institute and LGBTQ+ Victory Fund, to discuss what the data reveals about the climate LGBTQ+ candidates have found themselves in.
Low argued that the findings cannot be separated from the broader political environment facing LGBTQ+ Americans in 2026. Anti-transgender legislation continues to surge across the country while federal recognition of LGBTQ+ communities has diminished. This is the second consecutive year Trump has declined to recognize June as Pride month. He also made no public statement commemorating Juneteenth, the anniversary marking the emancipation of enslaved people in the United States.
The survey included 215 LGBTQ+ candidates who ran for office between 2023 and 2025 from 42 states, Puerto Rico, and D.C., and asked about their experiences while running for office.
The data, while not particularly surprising given the highly divisive political era we have been living through under Trump 2.0, contains stark findings showing that LGBTQ+ candidates are not only finding it more difficult to run for office — something protected under the First and Fourteenth Amendments — but that it has also become increasingly dangerous for openly LGBTQ+ candidates to do so.
One of the report’s most significant findings focuses on what happens before an LGBTQ+ person’s name ever appears on a ballot or yard sign: widespread fear among prospective candidates. Nearly 9 in 10 candidates worried that running as an openly LGBTQ+ person would increase their risk of harassment or attack, while 4 in 5 feared physical violence.
Key Takeaways From the Data
Harassment Is the Norm — Not the Exception: Nearly two-thirds of LGBTQ+ candidates experienced in-person harassment, while nearly 8 in 10 faced online abuse, with many encountering it regularly.
The escalation from rhetoric to serious threats mirrors the current political climate. One in three candidates received death threats online, and one in seven experienced them in person, highlighting the severity of the current threat environment.
Campaigns Altered by Safety Concerns: More than half of candidates changed how or where they campaigned due to safety fears, and nearly 1 in 5 described the impact as significant — limiting public engagement and visibility.
Security Out of Reach: Fewer than 1 in 10 candidates could afford private security, even as threats escalated, underscoring a growing inequity in who can safely run for office.
Severe Mental Health Impact: Nearly two-thirds of candidates said attacks negatively impacted their mental health, with some reporting long-term trauma and lasting psychological effects.
“What we’re seeing is not just harassment, it’s a systemic challenge to participation,” said Elliot Imse, the now former executive director of LGBTQ+ Victory Institute. “When candidates are forced to change their behavior, limit public engagement, or reconsider running altogether because of safety concerns, that’s not just a personal issue — it’s a breakdown in the conditions required for a healthy democracy.”
“This isn’t theoretical — I, like so many LGBTQ+ candidates and elected leaders, have lived it,” said Daniel Hernandez, vice president of political programs at LGBTQ+ Victory Fund. “From surviving gun violence to having my own campaign office targeted, I know how real these threats are and how deeply they affect candidates, their teams, and their families. The LGBTQ+ Victory Institute has been doing this work for years — preparing candidates, supporting them through these challenges, and making sure they’re not facing it alone. This report makes clear the stakes are higher than ever. If we want people to step up and serve, we have to meet this moment with the resources, support, and commitment to their safety demands.”
Low, who before leading the Victory organizations was an openly gay elected official representing California’s 26th Assembly District, which includes portions of Silicon Valley and San Jose, views the findings as both a political violence issue and a threat to democracy itself.
“We’re living in a moment in a time in which the pendulum is swinging backwards,” Low told the Blade. “We’ve seen a historic amount of anti-LGBTQ+ legislative proposals across this country. So naturally, when members of our community are targeted, it gives that license then to be harassed and discriminated against accordingly. It absolutely is a challenge to democracy.”
The data also shows that LGBTQ+ candidates face unique barriers to entry — many of them financial. Low argued that reducing those barriers would help diversify candidate pools and create a more representative democracy.
“Does [the current system] disproportionately then impact and limit the segment within our populations to serve? The answer is absolutely yes. When you think about the increased challenges of a barrier to entry– that’s why we’re focused on doing the report in the first place. It also then goes to show the importance of how we utilize taxpayer dollars and budgets accordingly to help encourage and support members of the community to run for office.”
He used that point to emphasize the importance of the LGBTQ+ Victory Institute, not only in collecting data on these trends but also in helping LGBTQ+ candidates navigate them.
“That’s the fundamental reason why there’s the need for the Victory Fund of the Victory Institute,” he said. “It’s to say that the members of our community will not face this or run alone. They should know that there is a national network, a national organization that will be the wind in their sails to help guide them.”
So far in 2026, the Victory Fund has endorsed at least 249 candidates.
In addition to providing financial support, the Victory Institute helps LGBTQ+ candidates prepare for the realities of the campaign trail, including coping with harassment, threats, and personal security concerns.
Low expanded on what that reality looks like in 2026 as anti-transgender legislation continues to surge and federal recognition of LGBTQ+ communities has diminished.
“Part of that discussion is we don’t try to sugarcoat it,” he said when emphasizing the realities facing LGBTQ+ candidates. “We will speak truth about ‘Here’s how to put a campaign budget together’ and ‘Here’s best practices on public speaking.’ But also we have to deal with showing the unfortunate reality on ‘Here’s how to keep your family safe.’ ‘Here’s how to retain and keep in mind your mental health’…especially when you see members of our community being doxxed constantly by bots and such hate speech.”
He also highlighted the unique challenges facing transgender candidates running for office, particularly as hundreds of bills across the country continue to target transgender people.
“We hear that many times there may be individuals from the community, specifically the trans community, who may want to run for office, but their existence is criminalized, which is to say that they may live in a state or jurisdiction in which it’s criminal to exist; laws prohibiting them from being who they are,” Low said.
“When many of our candidates run for office, they are not running because they are trans, they’re not running because they’re gay or a member of their community, they’re running to advance the quality of life on the key issues on housing affordability, health care, education, you name it, and so these are the campaign issues, but the challenge exists as well.”
Those pressures often lead candidates to question whether running for office is worth the personal toll.
“Many times the candidate and/or elected official will speak candidly with members of our organization to say, ‘Is it worth it anymore? What should I do? Is this something that I should continue? This is taking a personal toll on my family, but I care about the call to service and making a difference in my community.'”
Low also spoke about what he sees as more than simple anti-LGBTQ+ bias in politics, pointing instead to the growing number of laws targeting LGBTQ+ people.
“I don’t think it’s simply bias — it’s fact. Again, we can cite laws on the books and proposals across the country, so no wonder why the conversation is so toxic and hostile to members of our community.”
Despite those threats, Low said LGBTQ+ candidates continue to run for office in record numbers.
“While this political violence report does reflect the hard truth about the challenges to our community, we have seen more candidates apply for an endorsement and sign up for our programs than we’ve ever seen before. We have seen more candidates run for federal office than we ever have had in the history of our 35 years as an organization. What does that tell us? It tells us that yes, it is a challenging and harmful time, yet members of our community are willing to run toward the front lines and answer the call for service.”
The data shows that queer women and transgender candidates are among those most heavily impacted by political violence and heightened political polarization.
“We’ve seen specifically LGBTQ+ women and members of our trans community being disproportionately impacted by [political violence]. When you disaggregate the data, it is also really important to address within our community. We do know anecdotally, as well as from the report, that it may be more challenging for LGBTQ+ women and our trans individuals given some of the other cited conclusions.”
Two of the issues that disproportionately affect transgender candidates and LGBTQ+ women are mental health challenges and increased security needs.
“What we’ve seen is some of the top demands for services. In many jurisdictions, governmental entities do not have budgets for it– either access to mental health services, as well as public safety services,” he explained. “Security — whether it be surveillance cameras around their homes — those are the key areas. Oftentimes candidates are left to their own devices and may not have access to those key areas to support them.”
Low noted that when LGBTQ+ candidates are elected, they can advance policies aimed at reducing discrimination, pointing to legislation he championed while serving in California.
“I passed a bill to require Peace Officers Standards and Training curriculum on diversity training for members of the LGBT community. Police officers would have to go through diversity and sensitivity training with respect to members of the LGBT community. That’s something that I very much would like to see amplified, not just state by state, but at the federal level — federal funding to support standards and trainings in dealing with members of the LGBT community.”
“The key data points reflect an increase in not only violence but also intimidation and increased barriers to entry over the years. You can make the direct nexus between that of the increase in anti-LGBTQ+ legislation and the current rhetoric that exists in this political environment. It’s not just here in the United States — you see it globally as well. So it is something that most certainly we’re seeing increase.”
When asked about the long-term consequences, Low warned that political violence could make American democracy less representative and discourage future generations of LGBTQ+ leaders from seeking office.
“I think we will likely see a decrease in the diversification of candidates and their lived experiences. It can be insurmountable for those from a younger generation who have to put food on the table and support their families. When it takes political violence to a different level and doxxing and being harassed online, it’s taken on a whole new meaning. We may see that deterioration of the quality and caliber of candidates, or not as much participation from the wide segment of our LGBTQ+ community.”
The Blade also asked how he feels about the future given the current political climate.
“One can always be optimistic and hopeful for the future, but I won’t hold my breath.”
When asked what success would look like for the LGBTQ+ Victory Fund and LGBTQ+ Victory Institute, Low said he hopes to see a decrease in threats against candidates, more LGBTQ+ people elected to office, and fewer legislative efforts targeting the community.
“I think certainly a decrease when we do this report again and have seen a decrease [in threats] is oftentimes telling. But similarly, seeing less of the legislative proposals in various state houses that are hostile, that criminalize our existence, is another key factor. Those are the two data points that we would cite and highlight as it relates to the political climate with respect to LGBTQ+ leaders.”
Congress
EXCLUSIVE: Pelosi reflects on four decades of LGBTQ+ advocacy
Blade spoke with House speaker emerita before her 2027 retirement
For nearly four decades, House Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) has been one of the most influential champions of LGBTQ+ rights in American politics.
The former U.S. House of Representatives speaker helped lead landmark LGBTQ+ legislation through Congress; including the repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” passage of the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act, and multiple House approvals of the Equality Act. She also played a central role in congressional efforts to combat HIV/AIDS and oppose restrictions targeting transgender Americans.
In an exclusive interview with the Los Angeles Blade; Pelosi reflected on those accomplishments, the role grassroots activists played in achieving them, and the ongoing challenges facing the LGBTQ+ community during President Donald Trump’s second term.
When asked which LGBTQ+-related achievement she is most proud of, Pelosi pointed not to a specific bill, but to the movement that made those victories possible — and the loud, strong-willed grassroots believers in a better America than the one they had found themselves in.
“Anything that we accomplished, whether it was fighting HIV and AIDS, ending discrimination, passing hate crimes legislation, or ending ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,’ would never have happened without outside mobilization,” Pelosi said, expressing gratitude for those who saw a problem and dared to speak its solution into existence. “Our inside maneuvering was important, but we couldn’t do our best job without the community. Every chance I get, I thank them for their patriotism because they make democracy function.”
Pelosi explained that her initial LGBTQ+ advocacy efforts were directly shaped by the LGBTQ+ community in the San Francisco area and by the HIV/AIDS epidemic that decimated the community during the 1980s.
The former speaker recalled arriving in Congress in 1987 and making HIV/AIDS a centerpiece of her agenda from the start.
“My first words on the House floor were that I had come here to fight HIV and AIDS,” Pelosi told the Blade. “People asked why I would make that my first statement. To me, that reaction showed just how much discrimination still existed and how much work remained to be done.”
She continued, explaining that advocating for San Francisco — with its once-vibrant LGBTQ+ community that was dying more with every passing day — became a joint effort between community-driven activists and government officials trying to manage and mitigate the crisis that claimed more American lives than the Vietnam War.
“When we were trying to bring the Democratic convention to San Francisco, people were saying they couldn’t come because of HIV/AIDS,” she said. “What emerged from that moment was community-based advocacy, community-based care, prevention, and research. Every success we had sprang from the community itself.”
Multiple times during the interview, Pelosi returned to those four pillars of the effort to combat HIV/AIDS: community-based advocacy, community-based care, prevention, and research.
She argued that the epidemic, despite its horrific toll, ultimately helped many Americans better understand and accept LGBTQ+ people in a society that had not been as tolerant.
“When families learned that a son or daughter was HIV-positive and gay, barriers started to break down,” Pelosi said. “Love prevailed in many cases. I actually give HIV/AIDS some credit for the acceptance of marriage equality because people began seeing these issues through the lens of family.”
Pelosi also highlighted the passage of federal hate crimes legislation as one of her — and the LGBTQ+ rights movement’s — most defining victories.
“Matthew Shepard’s mother came and spoke to members. (The late-former Massachusetts Congressman) Barney Frank told his story. We had to convince people that leadership means leading, not following,” Pelosi said. “That legislation was incredibly important because it forced people to confront the real consequences of hate.”
She said she refused pressure to remove transgender protections from the bill, despite promises from others that it would pass more easily if lawmakers only protected what they viewed as the least vulnerable groups.
“People told me, ‘You can pass this in a minute if you take out trans,'” Pelosi recalled. “I said, ‘I won’t pass it in 100 years because I’m not ever taking out trans.’ We passed it with trans protections included.”
The Blade also asked Pelosi about the stalled passage of the Equality Act — which would add federal protections for LGBTQ+ people through amendments to the Civil Rights Act of 1964 that would explicitly prohibit discrimination based on sex, sexual orientation, and gender identity. She expressed confidence that the Equality Act will eventually become law, though she acknowledged the political obstacles that have persisted since its creation in the 1970s.
In her office, among bowls of Ghirardelli chocolates and prints depicting national parks in her district, a large photo hangs on the wall showing Pelosi standing at the House rostrum with LGBTQ+ advocates beneath the words “#EQUALITY ACT” — photographic proof that she had already passed the landmark legislation in the House, if only the U.S. Senate had agreed.
“We passed it in the House again and again,” she said. “The Senate is more difficult because of the procedural hurdles, but we’re not stopping. We’ll stick with it until the job is done.”
The longtime Democratic leader also credited civil rights icon John Lewis with helping build support for the legislation when others argued the growing LGBTQ+ rights movement was, as one California Democratic legislator put it, “too fast, too much, too soon.”
“There were people who worried about opening up the Civil Rights Act to include LGBTQ protections,” Pelosi said. “John Lewis told us, ‘We can’t wait. We must do it now.’ He was instrumental in helping move that effort forward.”
Much of the conversation eventually turned to the Trump-Vance administration’s policies affecting trans Americans.
Pelosi argued that Executive Order 14183, “Prioritizing Military Excellence and Readiness,” which puts restrictions on trans military service weakens national security, and efforts to limit gender-affirming healthcare for trans children with the Executive Order “Protecting Children From Chemical and Surgical Mutilation” ignores the needs of families.
“When they diminish the ability of transgender people to serve in the military, they diminish our national security,” she said. “At the same time, families are being told they can’t get the care their children need. That is deeply troubling.”
She recounted hearing testimony from conservative parents whose views changed after their own children came out as trans — a transformation she said changed hearts and minds, even among people she had once seen wearing red MAGA hats.
“One mother told us she was a Trump supporter until her child needed medical care and her state wouldn’t allow it,” Pelosi said. “She said she had to leave Texas to care for her child. Hearing stories like that reminds people that these are families, not political talking points.”
Pelosi described efforts to restrict healthcare access for trans youth as both discriminatory and morally wrong.
“Some of the things they’re doing by refusing to support clinics that meet the needs of trans kids are sinful,” she said. “I’m a religious person, and I believe every child is God’s child. We have a responsibility to meet their needs.”
Asked what she would say to people who oppose LGBTQ+ equality, Pelosi returned to a theme that surfaced throughout the interview: love.
“I’ve seen families completely transform when these issues become personal,” she said. “People who once opposed HIV/AIDS funding became advocates when someone they loved was affected. Love has a way of changing hearts.”
As for how she hopes history remembers her role in the movement, Pelosi again shifted attention away from herself and toward activists.
“People were dying, and the community demanded action,” she said. “I hope people remember that the progress we made came from the very vocal participation of LGBTQ people and their allies. I was honored that they trusted me to carry that fight in Congress.”
Pelosi, who has announced she will not seek reelection and plans to retire from the House in 2027, said the struggle for equality is far from over.
“Every major expansion of rights in this country has been a long struggle,” she said. “We’ve laid a foundation, but there is still more work to do. We still have to pass the Equality Act.”
When asked what she credits for the change in public understanding and the growth of the LGBTQ+ movement, she said respect lies at its foundation.
“This month, Pride Month, people would say to me, ‘It’s easy for you because you’re from San Francisco, and San Francisco is so tolerant,'” Pelosi said. “And I would say to them, ‘Tolerant to me is a condescending word.’ Tolerance is a good word writ large, but in terms of the subject, it’s not about tolerance — it’s about respect. Respect is what made it almost inevitable that I would have nothing but enthusiasm for what I was doing. We don’t just respect — we take pride in our community. But that pride springs from respect that people have to have for everything, including the differences that they see.”
Politics
Tom Steyer and Nithya Raman shift to second place as mail-in ballots turn the tide
Mail-In ballots are changing the shape of key LA races
California’s “jungle primary” has caused a lot of interesting political discussion and stress. California’s nonpartisan primary means any of the top two vote-getters can proceed to the general election. This meant ballots that were pages long in the key races for mayor and governor. This also means that there’s the potential for two Democrats running for key positions like mayor and governor.
The major players are Karen Bass, running for reelection as LA Mayor, who has secured a spot in the general. Former reality personality Spencer Pratt (R) and progressive candidate Nithya Raman (D) are in contention for second place, with Raman securing a lead as of the latest voter count. For Governor, Xavier Becerra (D) has secured his spot. Republican Steve Hilton and Billionaire Tom Steyer are up to run against him. Steyer put up some of his own wealth and has touted himself as a more progressive candidate. On Election Day, he seemed out of the race, but he is currently running in second place.
The nature of Los Angeles’s primary created some extensive fear over the large number of democrat candidates potentially splitting the vote. Currently, about 80% of the votes have been counted. This has shifted stats with 79.25% of the votes in this election being Vote by Mail. The voter turnout is still a bit low, considering it’s still only 32.21% of 23 million registered voters.
The post-Covid shift to mail-in ballots has meant that more people can vote.
Voting officials have 30 days after the election to count all of the remaining ballots. This includes matching the signatures of the envelope to the signature on the ballot, which is the cause of the delay. The final results will be reported to the Secretary of State by July 3, 2026.
Equality California, the largest statewide LGBTQ+ civil rights organization, was quick to congratulate Democratic candidate Becerra for confirming his place in the general election. Tony Hoang, Executive Director of the organization, says, “These results demonstrate that Californians are looking for experienced, values-driven leadership to guide our state through a challenging moment for our country.”
Hoang adds, “Xavier Becerra has spent his career standing up for civil rights, defending access to healthcare, protecting immigrant families, and fighting for the communities that need it most. We are proud to congratulate him on his primary election victory.”
As California Attorney General, Becerra defended marriage equality, challenged discriminatory policies targeting LGBTQ+ people, and fought to protect access to healthcare and reproductive freedom. As Secretary of Health and Human Services, he helped defend healthcare access for millions of Americans and strengthened protections for vulnerable communities.
“At a time when LGBTQ+ people are facing coordinated attacks across the country, California needs a governor who has not only spoken out but taken action to defend our community,” Hoang adds. “From standing up to Donald Trump in court to affirming that transgender healthcare is medically necessary at the highest levels of our nation’s health system, Xavier Becerra has used all of his positions of power to defend our community’s rights and dignity.”
Another beneficiary of the wave of mail-in ballots is former West Hollywood mayor John Erickson and his run for California Senate, who jumped from third place to first place, securing 19.58% of the votes. He told the Blade, “I am grateful to every voter in the 24th State Senate district who chose truth to power over the use of despicable homophobic tropes and malicious attacks on me. I am humbled by the outcome of the Primary, which, as of today, has me comfortably as the top vote getter, but the road ahead will not be easy.” He adds, “I am sure the same billionaires and powerful special interests who came after me in the Primary will continue through the General—just as I will continue to campaign on my record and experience-based ideas to make California more equitable, affordable, sustainable, and safe for all of us.”
You can stay up-to-date on vote counts by checking the state’s election results. But it is clear that every vote counts, with many of these mail-in votes changing the shape of this election and showing the potential of many different candidates to affect California politics.
Absolut Tabasco Celebrates ‘Confessions II’ with the Queen of Pop: Absolut-ly spicy!
Former council member John Duran is running for one last term
‘Transcendent’ a tough but important read
Queen Camilla meets with JK Rowling
Ethereal ‘Camp’ a moody allegory for queer shame
45 years later…: Advocate Karl Schmid on why HIV is far from over
Tens of thousands participate in post-Orbán Budapest Pride march
Supreme Court upholds state laws banning trans athletes from sports teams
LGBTQ+ rights gains in Asia come through courts, not legislatures
EXCLUSIVE: Pressley rips State Department over LGBTQ+ rights rollbacks abroad
-
AIDS and HIV5 days ago45 years later…: Advocate Karl Schmid on why HIV is far from over
-
Hungary4 days agoTens of thousands participate in post-Orbán Budapest Pride march
-
U.S. Supreme Court4 days agoSupreme Court upholds state laws banning trans athletes from sports teams
-
Asia4 days agoLGBTQ+ rights gains in Asia come through courts, not legislatures
-
Congress4 days agoEXCLUSIVE: Pressley rips State Department over LGBTQ+ rights rollbacks abroad
-
U.S. Federal Courts5 days agoCourt to weigh class action status in trans military ban challenge
-
a&e features3 days agoYona Speidel and the future of trans television
-
California Politics5 days agoFrom the desk of Equality California: The latest political developments in CA and D.C.
-
Mexico3 days agoGay US couple among four people found dead in Mexico mass grave
-
Chile4 days agoSantiago Pride march doubles as protest against new Chilean president