Connect with us

Politics

Vice-President & local leaders discuss reproductive rights & Prop 1

The Vice-President has brought together leaders from across the nation who are fighting to protect reproductive health care & abortion access

Published

on

U.S. Senator Alex Padilla (D-CA) speaking at event on reproductive rights, Oct. 17, 2022 (Photo Credit: Office of Sen. Alex Padilla)

LOS ANGELES – Mayor Eric Garcetti opened an event Monday afternoon which was organized as a conversation about protecting reproductive rights and the need for passage of Proposition 1, a California Ballot Proposition and State Constitutional Amendment that, if approved by voters, would establish a Constitutional right to reproductive freedom in California.

The event, facilitated by Vice-President Kamala Harris at the Nate Holden Performing Arts Center in LA, included discussions and remarks from Los Angeles mayoral candidate Rep. Karen Bass (D-CA-37), Celinda Vázquez, Vice President of Public Affairs for Planned Parenthood Los Angeles, U.S. Senator Alex Padilla (D-CA), Director Melanie Fontes Rainer, the Office of Civil Rights, U.S. Department of Human Health & Services

California Attorney General Rob Bonta and California’s Senate President pro Tempore State Senator Toni G. Atkins, were also in attendance.

Sen. Padilla highlighted California’s leadership in protecting a woman’s right to choose and Proposition 1, which will appear on the November ballot in California and would codify the right to abortion access in the state constitution.

Padilla also raised the alarm about the increasing number of Republican state legislatures working to claw back women’s reproductive rights and the need to act urgently to stop them by codifying the right to an abortion into federal law.

“Abortion is a fundamental right in America,” said Senator Padilla. “While in California, the right to an abortion is currently safe, the worst thing we could do is grow numb to this crisis. For years, Republicans in Congress and in state legislatures have worked to strip away the reproductive rights of women across the country—and in June they got their wish. That’s why we must continue to grow our Democratic majorities so we can prevent a national abortion ban. We won’t give up the fight to codify Roe, and protect once and for all the right to an abortion.”

Rep. Karen Bass introduced and welcomed Celinda Vázquez, Vice President of Public Affairs for Planned Parenthood Los Angeles, on stage. Bass then praised Harris’ leadership and welcomed Harris on stage. Bass and Harris hugged. Bass, Vázquez and Harris then sat down to discuss abortion. 

The Vice President highlighted the administration’s efforts to preserve access to abortion and reproductive healthcare. HHS contacted pharmacies to describe “their legal requirement to administer medication as prescribed,” Harris said, and that DOJ has a task force to pursue “whatever litigation is appropriate.” 

“This is about freedom and liberty,” Harris said. “22 days, there is an election, that is a fact. We need to hold on to what we have, and we need two more senators,” Harris said adding, “We’re going to have to protect these rights by having national legislation,” Harris said. “We need people in Congress to recognize that responsibility.” 

The Vice-President has brought together leaders from across the nation who are on the frontlines fighting to protect reproductive health care and abortion access. Earlier this month, she traveled to Connecticut and Texas to participate in conversations with reproductive rights leaders, she chaired the Second Meeting of the Interagency Task Force on Reproductive Healthcare Access, and she convened student leaders at the White House.

Since May, she has held more than 20 convenings and met with 180+ state legislators from 18 states to discuss protecting reproductive rights. The Vice President has also convened health care providers, constitutional law experts, faith leaders, state attorneys general, disability rights leaders, higher education leaders, students, and advocates.

Proposition 1 will appear on the November 8 General Election Ballot for California Voters. It was authored by the President Pro Tempore of the California State Senate, Toni Atkins, D-San Diego and co-authored by the Speaker of the California State Assembly, Anthony Rendon, D-Lakewood.

Proposition 1 is a direct response to the June 2022 Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, overturning the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision, ruling that the Constitution of the United States does not confer a right to abortion.

Watch the conversation here:

Transcript: Remarks by Vice President Harris in a Conversation on Protecting Reproductive Rights

REPRESENTATIVE BASS:  How was that?  How was that for a welcome home?
 
THE VICE PRESIDENT:  It is good to be home.  It’s good to be home. 
 
REPRESENTATIVE BASS:  Well, we love having you in L.A.  Absolutely.  So, why don’t we get right to it?  This is an important moment in the time of our fight for rights.  So, tell us what it is like for you to be championing this issue?  How has it been?  I read off all of the meetings, all of the state legislatures.  You’re going around the country.  What’s it feel like?
 
THE VICE PRESIDENT:  It’s a combination of feelings that I think we all have about this.  And when I’m traveling the country, one of the feelings that I hear most is fear.  It’s fear.
 
But I’ll tell you, you know, here’s how I think about it: You know, people have asked me, “Well, what has caused you to focus a large part of your work on…” — as you said — “…the health, safety, and well-being of women and children?” 
 
And, as you know, I was raised by a mother who had two goals in her life: to raise her two children — my sister, Maya, and me — and to end breast cancer.  She was a breast cancer researcher, a scientist. 
 
And so, from my earliest days of life, I remember my mother being so passionate about women’s health and access to health, and it was always grounded, so much of her work, in the importance of women having dignity in the healthcare system — in the healthcare delivery system and — and having rights and having power over the decisions that were being made so that it would be theirs to make, whatever it was. 
 
And that’s how I was raised.  I mean, you know, I was raised hearing the phrase “mammary gland” all the time.  It was — it was just a common word in our household. 
 
And so, when I think about this issue and this fight right now, it’s an extension of that.  And so, to your point, I have been traveling the country in so-called red states and so-called blue states, talking with leaders on the ground — in particular a lot of state-elected leaders, legislators — about what we can do collectively to build up support for what we need to do, which is to empower women and restore their rights on this issue.
 
But it’s — really, it’s — it was unthinkable, I think, for so many of us.  We knew it might happen, but let — I mean, let’s just pause for a moment.  The highest court in our land, the United States Supreme Court, just took a constitutional right that had been recognized from the people of America, from the women of America.
 
And if I may, I would like to put it in context to how I feel about this in the context of being Vice President.  So, as Vice President, in the last a year and a half, I have, as of now — my staff has counted — I have now met directly or by phone with 100 world leaders, presidents, prime ministers, chancellors, kings.  And here’s what I think we all know about what those experiences are like: The United States — we, as Americans — can walk in those rooms with a certain level of authority —
 
REPRESENTATIVE BASS:  That’s right.
 
THE PRESIDENT:  — chin up, shoulders back — to talk in those rooms about the importance of democracy, the importance of rule of law, the importance of human rights.  And in that way, we have held ourselves out to be and have been considered a role model on these matters. 
 
But what we, as role models, all know is that when you are role model, people watch what you do to see if it matches what you say. 
 
And the point then is a realization that this issue is not only directly impacting the people of America, but when we think about autocratic governments around the world who can then look to their people and say, “Well, you want to hold up America and rights as an example of what we should do?  Well, look at what they just did.”  So, by extension, what just happened will invariably impact women around the world. 
 
REPRESENTATIVE BASS:  That’s right.
 
THE VICE PRESIDENT:  So, there’s a lot of fear.  But also, as we all know, we know how to fight.
 
REPRESENTATIVE BASS:  Oh, yeah.
 
THE VICE PRESIDENT:  Because when you know what you stand for, you know what to fight for.  (Applause.) 
 
REPRESENTATIVE BASS:  Celinda.
 
MS. VÁZQUEZ:  We do know how to fight.  So, what steps is the administration taking to protect reproductive rights?
 
THE VICE PRESIDENT:  So, well — and, first, can I just say, it’s so good to be with the two of you on this stage?  It’s so good to be home. 
 
MS. VÁZQUEZ:  So good.
 
THE VICE PRESIDENT:  Celinda, you have been such an extraordinary fighter.  You and I’ve been in many of these rooms together in these past many, many months.  And I cannot thank you enough for being on the ground and the courage that it takes for our frontline folks, like you, to do what you are doing.  And to all of those who are here on the frontline, I applaud you.  Let us applaud them.  (Applause.) 
 
Because around the country and here, it is not without risk that you do what you do.
 
To Madam Congresswoman — (laughter).  It’s not a political event, I know.  (Laughs.)  You — you and I have worked together for so many years when I was AG and you were at the capitol — at the state capitol, and then in Washington, D.C.
 
You are a courageous, fearless fighter on so many of these issues.  And, in particular, what you have done throughout your career to be a strong voice for women, for children, for all communities, for the coalition: I thank you.  And it’s an honor to be on the stage with you as well.  (Applause.) 
 
And so, what we are doing as an administration is a number of things.  Through the Health and Human Services agency, led by a Californian, Secretary Xavier Becerra — (applause) — we are — we’ve been actually sending out a number of things that are really intended to make sure that there’s clarity in the midst of the confusion. 
 
And one of the things that HHS did that I think is very significant is sent out to pharmacies information about their legal requirement to administer medication as prescribed.  And — and I also applaud that agency for also having announced that they will investigate where there are any violations of the rules of conduct on that issue.
 
The Department of Education has been extraordinary.  Secretary Cardona has been doing some important work around making sure that that we protect students and their reproductive rights, including their ability to take leave from school for whatever reproductive healthcare they need, and make sure that there’s no discrimination in that regard.
 
The Department of Justice has been coordinating with a number of agencies as appropriate but has also set up, for example, a process of eliciting pro bono hours, because there are going to be so many folks who are on the ground doing the work who are not sure of the legal risks that they are taking in these various states.
 
They’ve also set up a task force, led by Vanita Gupta, who is a great civil rights lawyer, and they are pursuing whatever litigation is appropriate.
 
Also, through the Department of Justice, they’ve set up a hotline for providers, so there is an ability to report threats and things of that nature.
 
The FCC and the FTC are doing — the Federal Trade Commission, and the Federal Communications Commission — are doing important work to, one, check with the biggest providers to see what their privacy policies are and their data retention policies are.  And that’s extremely important. 
 
I think I have a website here, but I’ll tell you that the — that they’ve also set up a number for people to issue complaints and to register complaints around privacy violations, which is a big issue, because, of course, there are an assortment of mobile apps that folks use to monitor their menstruation cycle.  There are mobile apps that folks use to just get directions to go to a facility to get their healthcare, and we want to make sure that that information is not being violated. 
 
So, that is the kind of work that’s happening through our administration.
 
The President has signed two executive orders that relate to making a very clear statement that we intend to protect and defend the right that people have for travel and for access to emergency healthcare. 
 
The VA is doing great work, in terms of the number of women who are veterans, in ensuring that they will be able to have access to all of the care that they require — including the Department of Defense, because — think about it, if you’re a servicemember — and there are at least 300,000 women, I believe, who are in active service right now — you don’t have any choice where you’re deployed and could very well be deployed to a state where it’s been rendered illegal.
 
REPRESENTATIVE BASS:  Right.
 
THE VICE PRESIDENT:  And so, they’re working through what they can do to ensure that the servicemembers are not subject to — to those kinds of threats to their healthcare and their independence.
 
REPRESENTATIVE BASS:  Well, you know, Madam Vice President, this is kind of on the same lines of that.  I’m wondering what kind of stories you might be hearing from people.
 
You know, in another life, I worked in healthcare.  I’ve worked in the emergency room and also in primary care.  Every now and then, you hear a story in the news like a woman — a woman that has an ectopic pregnancy; or the 10-year-old girl; or a woman who is — if she carries the pregnancy to term, might not live.  As you’ve gone around the country, are you hearing stories like that?
 
THE VICE PRESIDENT:  I am hearing those stories.  And those are the stories that are the public stories.  But as you and I know, what we’re hearing about only is just a fraction of what’s actually happening.  Many of you know: As a former prosecutor, the bulk of my career as a prosecutor, I was focused on violent — crimes of violence against women and children, and, in particular, I specialized in child sexual assault cases. 
 
The vast majority of those cases are not reported.  And the idea that laws would be passed, as it relates to people who have endured and survived such violation and violence, and to then say to them, “And you will also not have autonomy over your body on this issue” — it’s immoral.  It’s immoral.
 
As a former prosecutor having handled those cases, I can tell you the vast majority of those cases are not reported for a variety of reasons that have to do with the nature of it all, including it might be about a family member, it might be about someone who otherwise could harm that person or their family.
 
And what’s happening in these states on that and so many other related issues is abhorent: punishing women, criminalizing healthcare providers.  In fact, I’m going to — I don’t know if everybody in the audience can see this.
 
(The Vice President holds up a map.)
 
This is a map of the United States.  So, you don’t need to see — you don’t need to read the words to see the point that I’m going to make. 
 
So, you see all the different colors.  So, one of the colors on this map is — represents the states in which abortion is banned from conception with no exceptions.  One color is abortion banned from conception with an exception for rape, but not incest.  Another, banned from conception with exceptions for rape and incest.  There’s a 6-week ban on here, a 15-week ban, an 18-week ban.  You get the point.
 
REPRESENTATIVE BASS:  Not incest?
 
THE VICE PRESIDENT:  Absolute —
 
MS. VÁZQUEZ:  No.
 
THE VICE PRESIDENT:  But absolute confusion —
 
REPRESENTATIVE BASS:  Yeah.  That’s (inaudible).
 
THE VICE PRESIDENT:  — which also creates an environment that is ripe for misinformation, disinformation, and predatory practices.
 
REPRESENTATIVE BASS:  Yeah.
 
THE VICE PRESIDENT:  So, in addition to what I’m seeing around the country, there’s fear.  There’s also just absolute and utter confusion about what are — for any individual: What are my rights?  And that is something that, we as opinion leaders, of which there are so many here, we have to continue to use our voice and our platform in a way that informs people about their rights with an — with a full appreciation that it’s so confusing they may not be aware.
 
MS. VÁZQUEZ:  So, you’ve touched upon this, but how else do you see the fight for reproductive freedom impacting the everyday lives of Americans?
 
THE VICE PRESIDENT:  (The Vice President reaches for the map.)
 
MS. VÁZQUEZ:  Right, so —
 
THE VICE PRESIDENT:  (Laughs.)  So, okay.
 
MS. VÁZQUEZ:  — just a little expansion. 
 
THE VICE PRESIDENT:  I love Venn diagrams.  Okay?  (Laughs.) 
 
MS. VÁZQUEZ:  Just a little expansion. 
 
THE VICE PRESIDENT:  I really do.  I love Venn diagrams — you know, the three circles — sometimes there are more.
 
So I asked my team,  “Do — do me a Venn diagram on — from which states are we seeing attacks on reproductive healthcare, voting rights, LGBTQ+ rights.”  You would not be surprised to know that there is a significant overlap.  Right? 
 
So that’s what — so when we talk about who’s being impacted, well, you know, if you read the Dobbs decision — or you don’t need to, I’ll just tell you — Clarence Thomas said the quiet part out loud: They’re coming for the right to conception, the right to marry the person you love.
 
But I do see in, then, this moment, another thing in that Venn diagram, which is the reminder about the importance of coalition building, of bringing together all those folks who have been fighting forever on reproductive healthcare and maternal mortality, something that Karen Bass has been a leader on, bringing together the folks that have been fighting forever on voting rights, bringing together all the folks who — who are responsible for the victory on marriage — but we still have so much more work to do — and building our coalition.
 
Because here’s the thing: There was a movement that was started generations ago that culminated in Roe v. Wade.  We are now the ones that are responsible for picking up that movement.  And as with any movement in our country that has been about progress and the expansion of rights, one of the most productive ingredients of those movements has been the coalition and our commitment to building that coalition and growing it, for a number of reasons, one is that we all have so much more in common than what separates us.  But the other is, almost everyone should understand what rights of theirs are subject to and now exposed to attack.
 
And on this point — my final point on this would be, we need to take back the flag on this.  Because this is absolutely about freedom and liberty. 
 
REPRESENTATIVE BASS:  Yes.
 
THE VICE PRESIDENT:  This is about freedom and liberty, which are foundational notions for the existence of our country.  These are founding principles that we, as Americans, hold dear: freedom and liberty.  And that means all of us are susceptible.
 
REPRESENTATIVE BASS:  And for freedom and liberty, we need to hold on to the House and the Senate, I’m just saying.  (Applause.) 
 
THE VICE PRESIDENT:  So, it’s not a political event, but that doesn’t mean we don’t speak truth.  (Laughter.) 
 
So, in fact, so, 22 days, there’s an election.
 
REPSENTATIVE BASS:  Yes.
 
THE VICE PRESIDENT:  That’s a — that’s a fact.  It is a fact that there is a bill in Congress that the congressmember was a part of leading — the Women’s Health Protection Act — which would codify, which means put into law, the protections of Roe v. Wade.
 
The Court took it away; Congress can put it back.
 
The President of the United States — our President, Joe Biden, has said he will not let this thing called the “filibuster” get in the way of signing that law.  All of those are facts.
 
It is also the fact that, in order for that bill to get to the President’s desk so he can sign it into law, we need two more senators.  We need to hold on to what we have, and we need two more senators.  That is a fact.
 
It is also fact, by the way, that in that same context, the President has said he will sign into law the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act.  (Applause.) 
 
Two more senators.
 
REPRESENTATIVE BASS:  I could think of two.  (Laughter.)
 
You know, along with this, in terms of, you know, understanding that the Dobbs decision was about the right to privacy and, Madam Vice President, you know, I’m not a lawyer, but I do wonder, like: How far could they go?
 
I mean, you know, Jim Crow laws?  I mean, could business say, “Well, it’s my right to only allow certain people to come in”?  How far — what are the implications?
 
THE VICE PRESIDENT:  I mean, I think you should — that everything that you can imagine, you should assume is possible.
 
It was unimaginable that the court of Thurgood Marshall would do what this court just did.
 
REPRESENTATIVE BASS:  Right.  Right.
 
THE VICE PRESIDENT:  And — and that’s, again, why I think that the point that you made about, you know, who is vulnerable to this moment: Everyone is vulnerable to this moment.
 
And we just — we have to understand that, I think, in so many ways, we are living in unsettled times. 
 
You think about it on the global stage, there is a war in Europe.  You know, for 70 years, there was an assumption that, in spite of the differences among nations, that there was still certain international rules and norms, including the importance of sovereignty and territorial integrity.  But with Russia’s unprovoked aggression in Ukraine, we see that we can’t necessarily take that for granted. 
 
Unsettled times.  Unsettled times.
 
The Voting Rights Act, guided by the United States Supreme Court in Shelby v. Holder, a decision they rendered in 2013, and then you look at what happened in 2020, which is historic numbers of people voted in the midst of a pandemic, including an historic number of young voters, and almost immediately thereafter — because that scared people —
 
REPRESENTATIVE BASS:  Right.  (Laughter.)
 
THE VICE PRESIDENT:  — there are children here — they started passing laws making it illegal to give people food and water if they’ve been standing in line for hours to vote; passing laws making it intentionally more difficult for people to vote.  Unsettled times.
 
We thought the issue of voting rights had been settled. 
 
Unsettled times.  In this year of our Lord 2022, taking away a woman’s ability to make decisions about her own body.
 
So, I think we have to listen to the words of Coretta Scott King.  You’ve heard me paraphrase her so many times on this.  She famously said: The fight for civil rights — which is the fight for justice, it’s the fight for equality, fight for freedom — the fight for civil rights must be fought and won with each generation.
 
REPRESENTATIVE BASS:  Yes.
 
THE VICE PRESIDENT:  Because let’s always remember that these rights will not be permanent if we are not prepared to be vigilant.
 
And in that way, this is so much about a democracy.  I think about democracy in this regard.  I think — I think of democracy as there’s a duality to it, in that, when it is intact, it is strong in terms of what it does to create a system that preserves and fights for rights, civil rights, human rights.  So, there’s an aspect to it that is about strength in terms of what it can do to lift people up.
 
On the other hand, it’s very fragile.  It’s extremely fragile.  It will only be as strong as our willingness to fight for it.  And so, fight we will.
 
MS. VÁZQUEZ:  You have touched upon many of these topics, but how are you seeing the intersection of attacks on — well, no, I think we already — we already did that.
 
But we have an expert here — our congresswoman worked on the floor — a maternal morbidity expert, and all of the things.  What — what is the administration doing to address the maternal mortality crisis, which, we know, we you’ve done a lot of work previously?
 
THE VICE PRESIDENT:  Thank you, Celinda.  Maternal mortality — and, again, I recognize and thank Karen Bass for her work as a leader on this for so many years.
 
In America today, Black women are three times more likely to die in connection with childbirth.  Native women, twice as likely.  Rural women, one and a half times likely.  And as it relates to, for example, the experience of Black women, it is unrelated to their educational level or their socioeconomic level.  It is very clear it literally has to do with the fact that when she walks into that clinic or that doctor’s office or that emergency room, she is not taken as seriously.
 
And so, there is a lot of work that needs to happen that also understands and appreciates that, for so many of these women — for example, women in rural America — are living in the midst of healthcare deserts.  There’s no hospitals.  I — I have somebody that’s very close to me whose relative just died, just weeks ago, in connecti- — during childbirth, and the baby died, in rural America.  Because there was nowhere, where she lived, to get her the kind of care that the complication required.  Right?
 
So, this is a big issue.  But the idea that in this country, at this time, it is still such an issue of the proportion.
 
And so, there are a number of things.  One, when I was in the Senate, we had a bill that would address the bias in the healthcare delivery system and require training of healthcare providers — of all types of healthcare providers.  And I wrote into it, in particular, that the trainers would include doulas, who — (applause) — yes — who provide some of the best care and could teach a few things to others.
 
We are doing the work as an administration of — you know, I’m very proud of this — we have lifted this issue up to the stage of the White House, actually convened a group of leaders to come to the White House to present on this issue. 
 
We have done the work of also extending in states Medicaid coverage and encouraging, in extension — can you believe?  Okay, so Medicaid — (applause) — Medicaid covers, but we’re changing this — only two months of postpartum care.  Two months.
 
REPRESENTATIVE BASS:  You better not have a problem. 
 
THE VICE PRESIDENT:  You just gave birth to a human being.
 
REPRESENTATIVE BASS:  Right?
 
THE VICE PRESIDENT:  So, there is — so we’re extending it to 12 months — right? —
 
REPRESENTATIVE BASS:  Excellent.  That’s great.
 
THE VICE PRESIDENT:  — for all that that requires and it requires, you know, the details of pelvic examinations.  It requires the details of whatever kind of healthcare that might be, you know, in any level of the body.  Healthcare — for mental healthcare, physical.
 
And so, this is some of the work we are doing, and — and it’s a good start.  There’s more work to be done, also recognizing that the disparities exist based on also lack of access to transportation, lack of access to all types of healthcare, in addition to maternal healthcare.  Because there is so much of this that also can be attributed to unique stressors, right?
 
Take, for example, the fact that poverty is trauma inducing.  And what that might mean, in terms of the unique stressors that low-income women are facing that can have an impact on their pregnancy. 
 
And so, all of this work is being done by our administration in conjunction with the Congress.  We have the “Momnibus” — we called it the “Momnibus.”  An omnibus bill.
 
REPRESENTATIVE BASS:  Yes.  Yes, that’s great.
 
THE VICE PRESIDENT:  And we —
 
REPRESENTATIVE BASS:  That was a great effort.  Members of the Congressional Black Caucus that led that effort.  
 
THE VICE PRESIDENT:  Exactly. 
 
REPRESENTATIVE BASS:  You know, when you were talking about maternal mortality, especially amongst Black women, when Beyoncé and Serena Williams get into trouble —
 
THE VICE PRESIDENT:  Right?
 
REPRESENTATIVE BASS:  — when they’re in the delivery room, we know this is a huge problem.
 
THE VICE PRESIDENT:  That’s exactly right.
 
REPRESENTATIVE BASS:  The idea that you have high rates of maternal death in the United States of America is an outrage in and of itself. 
 
How about a few words on contraception, in terms of what the administration has done?
 
THE VICE PRESIDENT:  Well, we have done some good work in terms of making clear that there is a right to contraception.
 
But, you know, I mean, to your point about what’s at risk, they pulled it back, but you saw what happened with the University Idaho — right? — which was — which was the issue was that the university — they pulled it back, so it’s no longer the case — but had essentially said that they would not provide contraception at the university. 
 
And you mentioned earlier that the convenings that I’ve been doing, one of them was with university presidents.  And I brought them in because, of course, they’re — the 18- through 24-year-old population is most at risk on this issue.
 
REPRESENTATIVE BASS:  Right.  That’s right.
 
THE VICE PRESIDENT:  And I brought them in and asked them, “Well, what’s your plan?” 
 
REPRESENTATIVE BASS:  (Laughs.)  And they said? 
 
THE VICE PRESIDENT:  And it was a good and productive meeting.
 
MS. VÁZQUEZ:  What did they say?
 
REPRESENTATIVE BASS:  (Inaudible.)
 
THE VICE PRESIDENT:  It was a (inaudible) meeting.
 
But, you know, for example, “What’s the plan?”  And I’ve just recently convened a bunch of extraordinary college student leaders, just in the White House, in my office, last week.  Just brilliant.  They’re brilliant.  They’re so good.  Like, the future of our country is so bright if they’re leading.  And — and — (applause) — yes.
 
And so, they — but we were talking about — for example, universities, colleges, community colleges, any, you know, educational institutions for educating after high school — what are they doing about privacy protocols as it relates to their health clinics? 
 
What are they doing as it relates to absenteeism, because they may be in a state where she has to go to another state to receive her abortion care? 
 
What are they doing in terms of — many universities, for example, will have — this might not be the right word — but bereavement funds, right?  So if a student has a death in the family and they can’t afford the transportation, that there’ll be assistance with that. 
 
Well — well, maybe we should be considering the fact that there are going to be students who can’t afford to leave the state and pay tuition and pay for books and pay for dorms, right?  And how are they thinking about that approach?
 
And so those issues have come up.  In connection also has been the issue of contraception and what are they doing to ensure that they are complying with the law but, at the same time, doing everything they can to fulfill a right that their students have.
 
REPRESENTATIVE BASS:  Well, Madam Vice President, I know you have so many places to go.  We would love to keep you here all day.  So we want you to come back again soon.
 
THE VICE PRESIDENT:  Of course.
 
REPRESENTATIVE BASS:  But maybe you can share some final thoughts.  Final thoughts about today, where you’re going, where you been.
 
THE VICE PRESIDENT:  Well, a few things.  You know, one of the — you know, the additional facts — if we don’t have the issue in California, we have an — we have extraordinary members of Congress.  Mayor Garcetti is here.  Rob Bonta, the Attorney General.  Alex Padilla, the senator.  Toni Atkins, who convened a bunch of state legislators for a previous meeting that I did in San Francisco.
 
But elections matter on this one, as with everything else.  When I’m traveling the country, I remind folks: Elections matter in terms of who your local prosecutor is.  If you’re in a state that has criminalized this, that matters. 
 
Who your governor is matters.  Governor Newsom has done an extraordinary job on this.  Because it’s going to be about whether, depending on the composition of their legislature, do they need to veto stuff that would be bad and restricting rights, or are they going to sign legislation that is about preserving and expanding rights where they’ve been taken away in particular.
 
And so, 22 days.  And the reality of it is that we’re going to have to protect these rights ultimately by having national legislation. 
 
And there’s only one path to getting there.  There’s only so much that the executive branch can do on this.  We have three coequal branches of government.  The Court has acted, and now we need Congress to act.  And so we need people in Congress to recognize that responsibility.
 
So I’d urge everyone to just remember that and to talk with your friends and your neighbors, in particular in states where these rights are being attacked, and to remind them.
 
And then my last point would be just to repeat: I think the coalition-building piece on this is so extraordinarily important.  You know, this is an intergenerational movement.  This is a movement among so many people who are allies, who are — who are in this together for so many reasons.
 
So let’s just stay committed to it all and know that this moment was meant for those of us who are here to recognize we cannot afford to throw up our hands on this; we got to roll up our sleeves.
 
Thank you all.  (Applause.)
 
REPRESENTATIVE BASS:  Roll up our sleeves!  Thank you.  Thank you so much.  It’s an honor to have you here.  Thank you.
 
MS. VÁZQUEZ:  Gracias, Madam Vice President.

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

Federal Government

Bureau of Prisons declines to reconsider transgender inmate policy

Democratic lawmakers raised concerns this week, lawsuit filed

Published

on

(Photo by Andrushko Galyna/Bigstock)

Following a letter sent Monday by several Democratic senators raising concerns about the Federal Bureau of Prisons’ updated transgender inmate policy, the BOP responded to a request for comment from the Los Angeles Blade, saying it does not plan to reverse the changes implemented earlier this year.

The policy was revised in 2025 to comply with President Donald Trump’s Executive Order 14168, titled “Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government.”

In a statement to the Blade, BOP spokesperson Donald Murphy said the updated policy is rooted in medical guidance and data-driven decision making.

“The BOP implemented the February 2025 policy to ensure that inmates with gender dysphoria are properly diagnosed and treated consistent with best medical practices,” he said. “Unlike the prior administration’s one-size-fits-all approach, the BOP’s new policy ensures individualized assessments and treatments. And while the previous administration’s policies on treating inmates with gender dysphoria was driven by radical ideology, the BOP’s current policy is based on medical studies, medical expert opinions, state correctional policies, caselaw, and penological concerns. Absent court order, there are no plans to reconsider or revisit the policy.”

U.S. Sens. Ed Markey (D-Mass.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), and Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii) signed the letter, arguing that the policy change fails to adequately prioritize the safety of trans inmates — protections they say are guaranteed under the Constitution.

This inquiry comes days after a federal lawsuit was filed against the Justice Department specifically on the concern that trans inmates are not receiving adequate care.

Earlier this month, the National Center for LGBTQ Rights, a legal organization focused on LGBTQ rights since 1977, filed a lawsuit in District Court of the District of Columbia against the Trump-Vance administration in collaboration with GLAD Law, Lowenstein Sandler LLP, and Wardenski P.C.

The suit, filed on May 6, alleges the administration is “ignoring federal protections” designed to prevent sexual abuse of incarcerated trans people.

“Transgender people in prison are sexually abused or assaulted at nearly 10x the rate of the general prison population,” the press release announcing the lawsuit states, adding that federal legislation was enacted to address those risks.

The plaintiff in the lawsuit, Paulina Poe, is a trans woman currently incarcerated in a men’s facility. According to the complaint, she has been “propositioned, groped, sexually harassed, and assaulted” by male inmates and subjected to strip searches by male officers — circumstances the Prison Rape Elimination Act regulations were intended to prevent.

The lawsuit also argues that the policy changes violate constitutional protections and deny trans inmates medically necessary care.

“The Eighth Amendment requires prisons and jails to provide ‘adequate medical care’ to incarcerated people which includes adequate treatment for people diagnosed with gender dysphoria,” says the Transgender Law Center. “‘Adequate medical care’ should be delivered according to accepted medical standards, such as WPATH’s Standards of Care. Some courts have said that in some circumstances ‘adequate medical care’ for gender dysphoria includes providing gender-appropriate clothing and grooming supplies, and the ability to present yourself consistent with your gender identity.”

GLAD Law Staff Attorney Sarah Austin also issued a statement when the lawsuit was announced, saying those responsible for the policy changes — and the rollback of protections under the Prison Rape Elimination Act — will be “held accountable for this egregious and lawless action.”

“The federal government’s unlawful attempt to roll back binding Prison Rape Elimination Act regulations is an especially dangerous step in its ongoing campaign to strip transgender people of legal protections,” Austin said. “The targeting of transgender incarcerated people is a deliberate choice to put vulnerable people in harm’s way simply because of who they are.”

The Justice Department has not responded to the Blade’s request for comment.

Continue Reading

White House

White House counterterrorism strategy targets ‘anti-American, radically pro-transgender’ groups

Administration released document last week

Published

on

President Donald Trump at the White House. (Washington Blade photo by Joe Reberkenny)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Continue Reading

Congress

Senate Democrats press DOJ over anti-trans prison directives

Markey joins other lawmakers in demanding reversal of policies

Published

on

(Photo by Andrushko Galyna/Bigstock)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Continue Reading

California Politics

Meet John Erickson, candidate for California State Senate District 24

“I’m the only candidate with a proven track record of courageous legislation,” Erickson says

Published

on

John Erickson

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Continue Reading

Federal Government

DOE investigates Smith College’s trans-inclusive policy

Mass. college accused of violating Title IX

Published

on

U.S. Department of Education building in D.C. (Public domain photo)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Continue Reading

Politics

California local elections matter: Here’s a look at Los Angeles

Two debates this week: the Mayor and Governor candidates on Wednesday on KNBC4, and the Gubernatorial debate on Tuesday on CNN

Published

on

Los Angeles elections

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Continue Reading

Politics

From the desk of Equality California: The latest updates impacting LGBTQ+ people across the state

EQCA shares the local and state political developments that affect LGBTQ+ people across California

Published

on

Equality California Equality Brief

We’re proud to partner with Los Angeles Blade to launch a new monthly column bringing you the latest updates impacting LGBTQ+ people across California. Each edition will draw from our weekly Equality Brief, with a focused look at the local and state developments that matter most to our community, including policy changes, legal updates, public health news, and opportunities to take action.

With LGBTQ+ people facing coordinated attacks across the country, staying informed is essential. California continues to play a critical role as both a leader and a line of defense, and the decisions made here have a real impact on people’s day-to-day lives.

In this column, we’ll break down what’s happening, what it means, and what comes next so you can stay informed and ready to take action.

To read more stories and sign up for the weekly Equality Brief, visit eqca.org/equalitybrief.

Supreme Court Rules ‘Conversion Therapy’ is Protected Speech:

In a 8-1 decision, the Supreme Court held that Colorado’s ‘conversion therapy’ ban is likely an unconstitutional violation of free speech. With this ruling — reframing therapy as protected speech — the Supreme Court weakens the ability of state licensing boards to regulate healthcare or to intervene if clinicians use unproven, misleading, or coercive techniques. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson was the lone dissenter, emphasizing that not only is conversion therapy ineffective, but former participants report that it causes lasting psychological harm. 

In response, Equality California is advancing SB 934 by Senator Scott Wiener, which would extend the statute of limitations so survivors of conversion therapy can pursue civil claims against licensed providers who subjected them to these harmful practices. This timely measure builds on California’s existing protections and expands access to justice for survivors. Read our statement.

Nation’s Largest Medical Group Reaffirms Support for Transition-Related Care for Minors:

In its March newsletter, the American Medical Association (AMA) — the largest physician organization in the country — reaffirmed its support for transition-related care for youth, emphasizing that access to care should not be impeded. The AMA is among the nation’s leading medical groups that have repeatedly stated that transition-related care is not only medically necessary for those who require it, but life-saving.

REPORT: 2 in 3 LGBTQ+ Students Feel Unsafe in School:

Glisten (formerly GLSEN) released its 2025 National School Climate Survey this week — a biannual report measuring the experiences of LGBTQ+ youth in K-12 schools — and the results show that hostility toward LGBTQ+ youth has increased, and students feel increasingly unsafe. Among the report’s key findings, 86% of trans students purposely avoid certain areas of their campuses, 62%  of LGBTQ+ youth experience harassment due to their sexual orientation, and 68% experience the same due to their gender identity or expression. The report surveyed 2,800 students across the country.

Pentagon Begins Removing Transgender Troops From Service:

According to a new court filing from the U.S. Justice Department, the Pentagon has begun initiating involuntary separation actions against at least two current servicemembers. Cadet Hunter Marquez and First Lieutenant Sean Kersch-Hamer, both members of the Air Force, are challenging the administration’s transgender military ban in the case of Talbott v. United States; the ban is currently in effect pending further legal action.

Federal Judge Strikes Down Anti-Trans ‘Kennedy Declaration’:

On Saturday, April 18, Judge Mustafa T. Kasubhai of the Federal District Court of Oregon summarily invalidated a December declaration from HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. that sought to severely restrict access to medically-necessary healthcare for transgender youth. In a sweeping and sharply worded rebuke, Judge Kasubhai made clear that the administration’s actions were unlawful and dangerous, directly calling out Kennedy’s “unserious regard for the rule of law” and how such disregard “causes very real harm to very real people.” Following the decision, California Attorney General Rob Bonta issued new guidance for providers and hospitals regarding transition-related care, emphasizing they “can and should continue to provide [care].” Read our statement here.

RFK, Jr. Claims ‘Press 3’ Crisis Line Option Will Be Reinstated:

HHS Secretary Kennedy said in a Senate hearing that specialized services for LGBTQ+ youth through the 988 Suicide Prevention Hotline will be restored after it was abruptly cut last summer. A recent study has found that after the launch of the hotline in 2022, suicide deaths among teens and young adults were about 11% lower than expected, amounting to roughly 4,400 fewer deaths through 2024. It remains to be seen whether RFK, Jr. — who has advanced numerous anti-LGBTQ+ policies — will follow through on that commitment.

Federal Challenge Filed Against Anti-Transgender Idaho Bathroom Ban:

Lambda Legal, the nation’s largest LGBTQ+ civil rights legal organization, and other legal groups filed suit in federal court on Thursday, April 30, on behalf of six transgender Idahoans in a challenge to the recently-passed HB 752. The bill, signed by Governor Brad Little earlier this year, is one of the most severe anti-transgender bathroom bans in the country; a first offense is a misdemeanor with up to a one-year prison sentence, while a second offense is a felony with up to five years in prison. The bill applies to all government buildings and businesses open to the public; Lambda’s Kell Olson and F. Curt Kirschner, Jr. say the law is “…intended to erase the very existence of Idaho’s transgender community.”

STATE LEGISLATIVE UPDATE

Equality California is advancing a comprehensive 2026 legislative package and budget request focused on protecting access to healthcare, strengthening privacy and safety, and expanding support for LGBTQ+ people across the state. At the center is a $26 million budget proposal to safeguard access to transgender healthcare by creating a state-only Medi-Cal funding pathway and stabilizing the provider network in response to increasing federal attacks.

All of our 2026 priority sponsored bills have successfully passed their initial policy committee hearings, and the majority are now in the Appropriations Committee’s “suspense file,” where they will be considered on May 14 alongside hundreds of other measures.

Our legislation includes efforts to enforce LGBTQ+ inclusive curriculum in schools, restore culturally competent crisis support for LGBTQ+ youth through the 988 suicide lifeline, and strengthen privacy protections for patients and providers as out-of-state attacks on abortion and transgender health care intensify. Additional measures expand access to HIV prevention, support transgender veterans, enhance safety at community events, allow people to challenge convictions rooted in gender bias, extend justice for survivors of conversion therapy, protect sensitive LGBTQ+ data, support LGBTQ+ people in higher education, and recognize chosen family in bereavement leave policies. Together, this package helps ensure LGBTQ+ people in California can live safely, access the care they need, and be treated with dignity.

To view our entire 2026 state legislative package, visit eqca.org/legislation

UPCOMING EVENTS

The 2026 San Diego Equality Awards are happening on Thursday, May 28 from 6:00 PM-10:00 PM. We’ll be back at the spectacular Loews Coronado Bay Resort. Be there as we celebrate San Diego City Councilmember Jennifer Campbell with the Vanguard Leadership Award; more honoree and special guest announcements will be coming soon. Get your tickets today!

Our Pride Parties return this summer as we gather in community and celebrate Pride 2026! Rise Up and join us at an event near you! Tickets are on sale now!

Los Angeles: Wednesday, June 10 @ Hi Tops Los Feliz
San Francisco: Tuesday, June 23 @ El Rio
San Diego: Tuesday, July 14 @ InsideOUT

Continue Reading

Congress

Republicans attach five anti-LGBTQ+ riders to State Department funding bill

Spending package would restrict Pride flags on federal buildings, trans healthcare, LGBTQ envoys

Published

on

(Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

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

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

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

The five riders are:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Continue Reading

Congress

Bill seeks to block global gag rule expansion

Policy now bans US foreign aid to groups promoting ‘gender ideology’

Published

on

President Donald Trump speaks at the State of the Union address at the U.S. Capitol on Feb. 24, 2026. A bill would block his administration's expansion of the global gag rule. (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

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

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

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

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

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

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

Meng in a Congressional Equality Caucus press release added the Trump-Vance administration’s “crusade against healthcare and global aid is putting millions of lives at risk worldwide.” 

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

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

Continue Reading

Congress

House Republicans push nationwide ‘Don’t Say Gay’ bill

Measures would restrict federal funding for LGBTQ+-affirming schools

Published

on

(Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Continue Reading

Popular