Politics
LA County native Leondra Kruger may be nominee for U.S. Supreme Court
If nominated and confirmed, Kruger would be not only the first Black woman on the court, but also the youngest justice
By Amy Howe | WASHINGTON – During a 2020 Democratic presidential primary debate, then-candidate Joe Biden pledged that, if elected, he would nominate a Black woman to serve on the U.S. Supreme Court. With Justice Stephen Breyer expected to retire at the end of this term, California Supreme Court Justice Leondra Kruger is one of the frontrunners to succeed him.
If nominated and confirmed, Kruger – who is just 45 years old – would be not only the first Black woman on the court, but also the youngest justice by over four years and the youngest justice confirmed since Clarence Thomas joined the court in 1991 at age 43. Despite her relative youth, Kruger would bring substantial experience at the high court, with 12 Supreme Court arguments under her belt, as well as a seven-year record on the California Supreme Court that resembles the record of the justice she would replace.
Early life and career
A native of southern California, Kruger is the daughter of two physicians. Her mother hails from Jamaica, while her late father was the son of Jewish immigrants from eastern Europe. Kruger attended the prestigious Polytechnic School, a private prep school in Pasadena, California, whose other alumni include Julia Child and James Ho, a judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit who was on former President Donald Trump’s short list to fill a Supreme Court vacancy.
After graduating from Polytechnic, Kruger compiled the kind of sterling resume the public has come to expect from Supreme Court nominees. She graduated with honors from Harvard University, where she was a reporter for the Harvard Crimson. Kruger covered a wide range of stories, including a hearing on Cambridge’s affirmative-action policy, the 1994 Senate race between the late Sen. Edward Kennedy and Mitt Romney, and a travel guide to her hometown of Pasadena that humorously dismissed East Coast stereotypes about catastrophes in California (“Earthquakes! Fires! Mudslides! Riots!”) as “only jealousy.”
After Harvard, Kruger went to Yale Law School, where she was the editor in chief of the Yale Law Journal – the first Black woman to hold that job. During law school, Kruger spent one summer as an intern for the U.S. attorney in Los Angeles and a second summer as a summer associate at Munger, Tolles & Olson. After graduating from Yale in 2001, she spent a year working as an associate at Jenner & Block in Washington, D.C., before going to clerk for Judge David Tatel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit from 2002 to 2003. Kruger went from the D.C. Circuit to the Supreme Court, where she clerked for Justice John Paul Stevens during the 2003-04 term.
When Kruger finished her clerkships, she went into private practice at a third firm, now known as WilmerHale. During her two years there, her clients included Shell Oil, which Kruger represented in an appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit involving a half-billion-dollar judgment in a Nicaraguan court against Shell and others, as well as Verizon Communications, which Kruger represented in federal district court in California in litigation challenging the participation by telecommunications companies in the government’s domestic-terrorist surveillance program. Kruger left WilmerHale for the University of Chicago Law School, where she taught a class in transnational litigation as a visiting assistant professor.
A stint in the Obama administration, including arguments at the Supreme Court
Kruger returned to Washington in 2007 to take a job as an assistant to the U.S. solicitor general. She served in that role for several years, until she was named the acting principal deputy solicitor general. The lawyer who holds that job, which is sometimes known as the “political deputy,” is normally the only deputy in the solicitor general’s office who is not a career civil servant (and the only other political appointee, beyond the solicitor general, in the office).
During her six years in the solicitor general’s office, Kruger argued 12 cases at the Supreme Court on behalf of the federal government. One of those cases was a high-profile dispute involving whether the “ministerial exception” to employment-discrimination laws – the idea that religious institutions normally have the sole right to determine who can act as their ministers – barred a lawsuit by a teacher and ordained minister who had been fired by the Lutheran school where she worked. Kruger argued that the teacher should be able to pursue her lawsuit against the school for alleged discrimination on the basis of disability. The Supreme Court, in an opinion by Chief Justice John Roberts, unanimously rejected that position and held that the ministerial exception applied.
The other cases Kruger argued touched on a wide range of issues, from the Sixth Amendment’s confrontation clause and right to counsel to federal “career criminal” laws and federal benefits laws. At the lectern, Kruger’s tone with the justices was conversational from the start, with a quiet confidence. She was poised even when she was being peppered with questions from all sides of the bench, as she was in defending an ultimately unsuccessful position in her first argument, in Begay v. United States.
Kruger left the solicitor general’s office in 2013 to serve as a deputy assistant attorney general in another section of the Department of Justice: the Office of Legal Counsel, which (among other things) provides legal advice to the president and other agencies within the executive branch. As Rory Little observed, that office has “yielded an unusual share of prominent federal judges and Justices over the past half century,” including the late Justice Antonin Scalia and the late Chief Justice William Rehnquist.
During her time in the Department of Justice, Kruger twice received the attorney general’s award for exceptional service, the department’s “highest award for employee performance.” Both awards give a glimpse into her work at DOJ beyond the courtroom. In 2013, she was part of a team that won the award for its work in defending the Affordable Care Act, while in 2014 she was a member of a group that won the award for its work implementing the Supreme Court’s 2013 decision in United States v. Windsor, striking down the federal Defense of Marriage Act.
An “out of the box” pick for the California Supreme Court
In 2014, California Governor Jerry Brown nominated Kruger, then just 38 years old, to serve on the California Supreme Court when Associate Justice Joyce Kennard retired. Kruger’s former bosses in the solicitor general’s office praised her selection, with then-Solicitor General Don Verrilli describing her as “brilliant, deeply principled and eloquent” and former Solicitor General Paul Clement calling her an “outstanding lawyer” who “combines an understated and easygoing manner with a keen legal mind and unquestioned integrity.” Former Acting Solicitor General Neal Katyal echoed those thoughts, saying that “California, and the nation, could do no better than Leondra Kruger.”
But despite those accolades from Washington, Kruger’s nomination was not greeted with unbridled enthusiasm within California because Kruger was not a practicing lawyer in the state, was not a judge, and lacked trial experience. However, Kruger was rated “exceptionally well qualified” by the California state bar group responsible for evaluating judicial nominees, and in December 2014 she was confirmed by the Commission on Judicial Appointments, a three-member body that holds a hearing to consider and decide whether to confirm nominees to the state’s highest courts. The commission’s members included Kamala Harris, then the state’s attorney general and now the vice president of the United States. Kruger was sworn into office in January 2015, becoming only the second Black woman to serve on the California Supreme Court.
Lawyers who practice regularly before that court describe Kruger in terms that are not unlike those used to characterize Breyer. In a November 2020 story for The Recorder, appellate lawyer Ben Feuer indicated that Kruger was “not looking to create radical change in the law emanating from the judicial branch.” “Rather,” Feuer continued, she understands the limited yet critical role the judicial branch plays in the complex ballet of our representative democracy.”
In a 2018 interview with the Los Angeles Times, Kruger herself said that she tries to do her job “in a way that enhances the predictability and stability of the law and public confidence and trust in the work of the courts.” Many of the published decisions that Kruger has written or joined while on the California Supreme Court have been unanimous rulings, with largely (although not uniformly) liberal-leaning results.
Upholding rights of the accused, from juvenile court to death-penalty cases
Kruger wrote for a unanimous court in April 2018 in a decision holding that videotaped statements by a three-year-old who claimed that she had been sexually molested by her father should not have been used as the basis to find that the child had been abused, which in turn led to an order for the father’s removal from the family’s home. Kruger acknowledged that juvenile courts have a “sensitive and difficult task” in such cases. However, she continued, the evidence in this case of the child’s reliability was “weaker than the juvenile court acknowledged.” The juvenile court failed to take into account that the child had also recently been molested by an older child, and that “[h]er repeated statements about abuse were strikingly similar to descriptions of that” incident. Moreover, Kruger added, “the child’s account contained both inconsistencies and inaccuracies that were woven through her core allegations.”
Photo: State of California
With automatic appeals to the California Supreme Court, death penalty cases are a staple of the court’s docket. However, California has not executed anyone since 2006, and in 2019 the state’s governor, Gavin Newsom, imposed an official moratorium on executions. In 2019, Kruger wrote for a unanimous court in overturning the death sentence of Jeffrey Scott Young, who was convicted of killing two people during a 2002 robbery and carjacking at an offsite parking lot near San Diego International Airport. The court agreed with Young that the jury should not have been allowed to consider evidence regarding his white supremacist beliefs and tattoos, which prosecutors had introduced during the sentencing phase of his trial to rebut evidence about his good character.
The specific evidence to which prosecutors had been responding, Kruger explained, was testimony from Young’s grandmother about, for example, “his commitment to his family and children.” Although the court did not rule out the possibility that, in a different case, evidence of a defendant’s racist beliefs could be admitted, it cannot be used, Kruger concluded, simply to demonstrate the offensiveness of those beliefs.
Kruger wrote again for a unanimous court in 2020 to throw out another death sentence, this time in the high-profile case of Scott Peterson, who was convicted and sentenced to death for the 2002 murders of his pregnant wife, Laci, and the couple’s unborn child, Conner. Kruger agreed with Peterson that the trial court had made “a series of clear and significant errors in jury selection that, under long-standing U.S. Supreme Court precedent, undermined Peterson’s right to an impartial jury at the penalty phase.” Most notably, Kruger explained, the trial court should not have dismissed potential jurors simply because they expressed general opposition to the death penalty, without also determining whether that opposition would have meant that they would be unable to follow the law and impose the death penalty if warranted. In December 2021, Peterson was resentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole.
Bodycam footage and sexual-abuse lawsuits
Two years ago, Kruger wrote for the court in its decision holding that a California city could not charge a public-interest group seeking public records for the approximately 40 hours that city employees spent editing footage from police body cameras. A local chapter of the National Lawyers Guild sought records relating to the Hayward Police Department’s actions in the 2014 demonstrations that followed grand jury decisions not to indict the police officers involved in the deaths of Eric Garner and Michael Brown. The city of Hayward billed the group $3,000, citing a state-law provision that requires the person or group requesting electronic records to pay the costs associated with producing copies of those records when producing those copies would require the extraction of data.
The extraction of data, Kruger explained, does not cover redacting exempt material from electronic records that the city would otherwise need to disclose. That interpretation, Kruger reasoned, is more consistent with both the text of the statute and the California legislature’s intent in enacting the law. Moreover, she added, interpreting the term “extraction” to include the costs of redaction “would make it more difficult for the public to access information kept in electronic format” – contrary to the state’s constitution, which “favors an interpretation that avoids erecting such substantial financial barriers to access.”
Kruger acknowledged the city’s argument that “requests for body camera footage present unique concerns for government agencies with limited resources” because of the privacy interests involved, among other things. But this provision does not only cover body-camera footage, Kruger stressed. Instead, she noted, “it covers every type of electronic record, from garden-variety emails to large government databases.” Only the legislature, Kruger indicated, can decide whether to create special rules for body-camera footage.
Last year, Kruger wrote for the court in a unanimous decision holding that three athletes who allege that they were sexually abused by a coach as teenagers can sue USA Taekwondo but not the U.S. Olympic Committee. In her opinion, Kruger rebuffed the plaintiffs’ suggestion that the court should adopt a “more flexible and holistic approach” to determine whether a defendant can be held responsible for failing to protect a victim from harm caused by another person. “Without denying the gravity of the injuries these plaintiffs suffered,” Kruger stressed, “nor the broader problem of sexual abuse of minors in organized youth sports and other activities,” a defendant cannot be held responsible for injuries that it did not cause “unless there are special circumstances” that create a special duty for the defendant to provide protection or help to the plaintiffs.
Other notable decisions Kruger joined
In 2018, Kruger joined a unanimous decision that upheld a state law requiring new handgun models to imprint “micro stamps” inside the guns and on shell casings to make it easier for police to identify them. The National Shooting Sports Foundation, a trade association for gun manufacturers, argued that the requirement should be invalidated because it was impossible to implement the technology. The decision by Justice Goodwin Liu emphasized that the ruling did not involve the constitutionality of the requirement, but instead was simply a question of statutory interpretation. The California Supreme Court’s cases, Liu explained, have acknowledged that statutes may contain an exception when it is impossible to comply with the law when that is what the legislature intended. But in this case, Liu wrote, neither the text nor the purpose of the law indicates that, once the law went into effect, gun manufacturers may be excused from the requirement because it is impossible to comply with it.
Kruger concurred in a 2019 opinion by Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye that unanimously upheld the death sentence of a man convicted of a brutal double murder and robbery. Cantil-Sakauye’s opinion also rejected the challenge by the inmate, Thomas Potts, to the constitutionality of the state’s death-penalty scheme, as well as his contention that his more than two decades on death row constitutes cruel and unusual punishment.
Kruger did not join a concurring opinion by Liu that, while expressing “tremendous compassion for the victims and their families,” characterized the state’s death-penalty system as “an expensive and dysfunctional system that does not deliver justice or closure in a timely manner, if at all.” It is time, Liu suggested, for a discussion of the death penalty’s “effectiveness and costs.”
Kruger joined a unanimous opinion by Justice Mariano-Florentino Cuellar, another Brown appointee, abolishing the state’s cash bail system. The question came to the court in the case of Kenneth Humphrey, a 66-year-old man charged with robbery. Humphrey’s bail was initially set at $600,000 and then was reduced to $350,000 – an amount that Humphrey still could not pay. Cuellar concluded that the “common practice of conditioning freedom solely on whether an arrestee can afford bail is unconstitutional.” “Other conditions of release,” he continued, including “electronic monitoring, regular check-ins with a pretrial case manager, community housing or shelter, and drug and alcohol treatment,” can often “protect public and victim safety as well as assure the arrestee’s appearance at trial.”
A varied record in divided cases
But not all of the California Supreme Court’s opinions are unanimous. And when the court has divided, Kruger has been difficult to pigeonhole. She has sometimes joined Democratic appointees to reach an arguably “liberal” result, but at other times she has joined Republican appointees to arrive at an arguably “conservative” result.
In the 2016 case Augustus v. ABM Security Services, Kruger declined to join Cuellar’s majority opinion holding that an employer violated state labor laws by requiring its employees – security guards – to keep their radios and pagers on during their rest periods in case they were needed. Cuellar, whose ruling was joined by four other justices, reasoned that the employer’s policies “conflict with an employer’s obligation to provide breaks relieving employees of all work-related duties and employer control.”
In an opinion joined by Justice Carol Corrigan, who was named to the court by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, a Republican, Kruger agreed with the majority that employers “must provide off-duty rest periods” for their employees. But, she continued, simply requiring those employees to carry a radio or a pager during their rest periods isn’t, standing alone, work – particularly when there is no evidence that the security guards’ rest periods were actually interrupted. Kruger would have sent the case back to the lower courts for them to determine whether the company’s “on-call policy actually interfered with its employees’ ability to use their rest periods as periods of rest.”
Kruger provided the key vote in 2018 in Hassell v. Bird, in which the court declined to uphold an order that would have required Yelp to remove negative reviews of a law firm from its site. A three-justice plurality, in an opinion by Cantil-Sakauye, another Schwarzenegger appointee, agreed with Yelp that requiring it to take down the reviews would violate Section 230 of the federal Communications Decency Act of 1996, which generally gives websites immunity for content created by their users. (Corrigan and Justice Ming Chin, who was appointed by Gov. Pete Wilson, a Republican, provided the other two votes for Cantil-Sakauye’s opinion.)
In a separate concurring opinion, Kruger explained that in her view it was “unnecessary to reach” the Section 230 issue. Instead, she would resolve the case on the “more basic” ground that Yelp – which had not been named as a defendant in the case – could not be required to take the review down without “its own day in court.” Kruger agreed that the majority had reached the correct result, but she emphasized that she would not weigh in on how Section 230 might apply more broadly in future cases. She reasoned that although Section 230 “has brought an end to a number of lawsuits seeking remedies for a wide range of civil wrongs accomplished through Internet postings,” “the broad sweep of section 230 remedies also has ‘troubling consequences.’” “Whether to maintain the status quo,” Kruger concluded, “is a question only Congress can decide.”
Joined by Cuellar and two other Brown appointees — Liu and Justice Joshua Groban — Kruger wrote for a 4-3 court in 2019 in throwing out a lower-court ruling that upheld a search of a car without a warrant to look for the driver’s identification. Kruger described the “central issue” before the court as “not whether the search of” the driver’s car was “consistent with the guidance given in” an earlier case, but instead whether to “continue to adhere to” that earlier decision in light of U.S. Supreme Court cases since then.
Noting that the California decision had become an outlier, Kruger observed that although the California Supreme Court’s ruling had “attempted to cordon off” the power it gave to police officers, experience had shown that in practice, the searches have come “perilously close” to full searches of the cars. There are other ways for officers to obtain the information that they need, she suggested, such as asking a driver for her name and date of birth and cross-checking that information against the Department of Motor Vehicles database.
Addressing the dissent’s argument that, without carving out an exception to the Fourth Amendment’s general warrant requirement for cases like this one, “officers may not be able to achieve absolute certainty about the identity of some subset of traffic violators before issuing traffic tickets,” Kruger countered that “the test for whether an exception should be recognized is not whether, in its absence, there might be some cost in effective enforcement of the traffic laws.” Instead, she wrote, it is “whether the tradeoff to lower that risk is worth the coin in diminished privacy.” “It is not,” she concluded, “a price we should lightly require California drivers to pay.”
In 2018, Kruger wrote for a divided court – in an opinion joined by Cantil-Sakauye, Chin, and Corrigan – in rejecting a challenge to a state law that requires law enforcement officials to collect DNA samples and fingerprints from anyone arrested for a felony. Following the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2013 decision in Maryland v. King, the majority concluded that the defendant in the case, Mark Buza, had been arrested for a serious offense – arson – and, at least as applied to him, the requirement therefore did not violate either the U.S. Constitution’s Fourth Amendment or the California constitution.
The majority did not weigh in on whether the law was valid for other defendants, and it rejected a suggestion – made by Liu and Cuellar, in dissenting opinions – that it determine whether the state can require a DNA sample before a judge determines that a defendant’s arrest was valid. Kruger stressed that the court’s holding was “limited,” and she explained that “the law teaches that we should ordinarily focus on the circumstances before us in determining whether the work of a coequal branch of government may stand or must fall.”
Kruger joined an opinion by Liu in 2019 that reinstated a challenge by psychotherapists to a state law that would require them to report to authorities patients who admit to viewing child pornography, even when the therapists don’t believe that the patients pose any harm to children. Writing for a four-justice majority, Liu acknowledged that the “proliferation of child pornography on the Internet is an urgent problem of national and international dimension,” but the court – over a dissent by Cantil-Sakauye, Chin, and Corrigan – concluded that the reporting requirement implicated an interest in privacy. Stressing that the court was not ruling that the reporting requirement was unconstitutional, Liu sent the case back to the lower courts for them to determine whether the reporting requirement actually advances the law’s purpose of protecting children, or whether it instead deters patients from seeking treatment for sexual disorders.
Kruger sided with the court’s conservative justices in a 4-3 ruling in 2017 that made it more difficult for inmates sentenced under the state’s “Three Strikes” law to obtain resentencing. In a separate concurring opinion joined by two of her colleagues, Kruger explained that the other provisions in the ballot initiative on which the inmates seeking resentencing relied reflected a “clear and exclusive focus on affording relief to individuals who have committed specified drug- and theft-related offenses, and neither the stated purposes of the proposition nor the ballot materials alerted voters to any possibility that a favorable vote might also result in a significant change to the separate statutory scheme governing the resentencing of life prisoners under the ‘Three Strikes’ law.” “Although this is certainly a choice the voters could make,” Kruger acknowledged, “I do not think we can say it is a choice the voters have already made.”
Under the California system, although Kruger was nominated by Brown and confirmed by the Commission on Judicial Appointments, she was still required to face the voters in a “retention election,” without an opponent, in 2018. Kruger won retention easily, with nearly 73% of voters – 6.6 million in total – voting “yes.”
Personal life
Kruger is married to Brian Hauck, a partner at the law firm of Jenner & Block and a former senior official in the Department of Justice during the Obama administration. The couple has two children: a son and a daughter.
When she had their daughter in 2016, Kruger became the first California Supreme Court justice to give birth while in office. A 2018 story in the Los Angeles Times recounted how Kruger traveled from the San Francisco Bay area, where she lives, to Los Angeles with her newborn to hear oral arguments; Kruger’s mother-in-law cared for the baby, then four weeks old, while Kruger was working.
If Biden nominates Kruger, it will not be his administration’s first effort to get Kruger to return to the east coast. In January, Marcia Coyle and Ryan Barber of the National Law Journal reported that Kruger had twice turned down offers to serve as the administration’s solicitor general. Like a position as a Supreme Court justice, that job requires Senate confirmation – but a job as a Supreme Court justice comes with life tenure.
*********************
Amy Howe is the former editor and a reporter for SCOTUSblog and still is a contributor. She primarily writes for her eponymous blog, Howe on the Court.
Before turning to full-time blogging, she served as counsel in over two dozen merits cases at the Supreme Court and argued two cases there.
Amy is a graduate of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and holds a master’s degree in Arab Studies and a law degree from Georgetown University.
*********************
The preceding article was previously published by SCOTUSBlog and is republished by permission.
Politics
GOP resolution targets Sarah McBride, the first trans member of Congress
U.S. Rep. Nancy Mace (R-S.C.) on Monday proposed a resolution that would prohibit House members and staffers from “using single-sex facilities other than those corresponding to their biological sex.”
The bill, which comes just two weeks after Sarah McBride was elected to become the first transgender member of Congress, would block her from accessing women’s bathrooms in the U.S. Capitol and House office buildings.
Republican leadership including House Speaker Mike Johnson (La.) have indicated they will seriously consider the proposal, while House Democrats denounced the effort as a cruel attempt to bully an incoming freshman colleague.
Congress
GOP resolution targets Sarah McBride, the first trans member of Congress
Bill by Rep. Mace would prohibit her from using women’s restrooms
Published 2 hours ago
on November 19, 2024
Delaware state Sen. Sarah McBride (Washington Blade photo by Daniel Truitt)
U.S. Rep. Nancy Mace (R-S.C.) on Monday proposed a resolution that would prohibit House members and staffers from “using single-sex facilities other than those corresponding to their biological sex.”
The bill, which comes just two weeks after Sarah McBride was elected to become the first transgender member of Congress, would block her from accessing women’s bathrooms in the U.S. Capitol and House office buildings.
Republican leadership including House Speaker Mike Johnson (La.) have indicated they will seriously consider the proposal, while House Democrats denounced the effort as a cruel attempt to bully an incoming freshman colleague.
“Every day Americans go to work with people who have life journeys different than their own and engage with them respectfully, I hope members of Congress can muster that same kindness,” McBride said in a post on X.
“This is a blatant attempt from far right-wing extremists to distract from the fact that they have no real solutions to what Americans are facing,” she said. “We should be focused on bringing down the cost of housing, health care, and child care, not manufacturing culture wars.”
“Delawareans sent me here to make the American dream more affordable and accessible and that’s what I’m focused on,” McBride added.
In her successful bid for Delaware’s at-large congressional seat, McBride’s campaign did not center the historic nature of her candidacy but rather her record of delivering results for her constituents like paid family and medical leave.
She did, however, talk about how everyone deserves a representative in Congress who respects them and their families.
Mace used transphobic language attacking McBride when speaking with reporters about her bill on Monday. “Sarah McBride doesn’t get a say. I mean, this is a biological man,” she said, adding that the lawmaker “does not belong in women’s spaces, women’s bathrooms, locker rooms, changing rooms, period, full stop” and instead should “use the men’s restroom.”
“I’m going to be standing in the brink, standing in his or her way, putting a stop to this insanity and this nonsense,” the South Carolina congresswoman said. She did not directly address a question about what “mechanism” might be used for “checking who’s qualified to use the ladies’ room,” but her bill specifies that the House sergeant-at-arms would be responsible for enforcement.
Asked whether she introduced the bill “specifically because Sarah McBride is coming to Congress,” Mace said “that, and more.”
Fielding questions from reporters on the steps of the Capitol Monday, far-right U.S. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (Ga.) endorsed her colleague’s proposal while using anti-trans language and deliberately misgendering the incoming congresswoman from Delaware.
“He is a man. He is a biological male,” she said. “He has plenty of places he can go.”
LGBTQ House members rally behind soon-to-be colleague
Gay U.S. Rep. Mark Pocan (D-Wis.), who chairs the Congressional Equality Caucus, shared a statement with the Washington Blade on Tuesday.
“It’s been a while since Nancy Mace has had her 15 minutes of fame,” he said. “Republicans keep desperately lashing out against trans people to try and distract from the fact that this Congress has been one of the least productive in history—they can’t even pass a Farm Bill or pass major appropriations bills, so they turn to using these cruel attacks to distract from their inability to govern and failure to deliver for the American people.”
“Nancy Mace’s resolution is a pathetic, attention-seeking attempt to grab Trump’s eye and the media spotlight—and trans people, including trans employees, are paying the price,” Pocan added.
Several of the eight other LGBTQ House members, all serving as co-chairs of the caucus, had spoken out against the bill as of Tuesday morning.
“The cruelty is the point,” U.S. Rep. Becca Balint (D-Vt.) said. “Is that what we want the sergeant-at-arms to be doing when we had an attack on the freaking Capitol?”
“Let’s call this what it is: bullying,” Equality PAC Co-Chairs Ranking Member Mark Takano (D-Calif.) and Congressman Ritchie Torres (D-N.Y.) said in a joint statement. “Instead of working to lower daily household costs for families and provide real relief for those struggling across our country, House Republicans have decided to single out one newly elected Member of Congress and make her life more difficult for absolutely no reason at all.”
“This is nothing more than a pathetic attempt from a member who has repeatedly shown no interest in governing simply to make headlines and get attention,” they said. “Congress has a responsibility to focus on the issues that matter to all Americans, not to police who uses which bathroom.”
The congressmen added, “Equality PAC stands proudly with Sarah as we fight back against this baseless attack on her and the trans community. And we will always stand up to bullies – especially those we serve alongside in the US. Capitol Building.”
HRC condemns Mace’s resolution
Human Rights Campaign spokesperson Laurel Powell released the following statement on Tuesday:
“Let’s call this what it is: Rather than focusing on issues that matter to Americans, Rep. Mace is seeking a spotlight by cruelly discriminating against her incoming colleague, the first openly transgender person to be elected to Congress.
“Her resolution would also target trans people who have worked and served in the Capitol long before this month’s elections–more proof this is merely a political charade by a grown-up bully.
“It is another warning sign that the incoming anti-equality House majority will continue to focus on targeting LGBTQ+ people rather than the cost of living, price gouging or any of the problems the American people elected them to solve.”
India
Kamala Harris’s loss prompts mixed reaction in India
Vice president’s mother was born in Chennai
Vice President Kamala Harris’s loss in the U.S. presidential election has elicited mixed reactions among LGBTQ+ activists in India.
A notable portion of Indians expressed support for now President-elect Donald Trump over Harris, even though her maternal lineage traces back to India. Her mother, Shyamala Gopalan, was born into a Brahmin family in Chennai in 1938, and her grandfather, PV Gopalan, hailed from the village of Thulasendrapuram in Tamil Nadu.
Harris’s loss prompted mixed reactions within the LGBTQ+ community.
While some individuals expressed disappointment, others backed Trump.
The Washington Blade in August reported that Harris’s grandfather moved to New Delhi to serve as a civil servant in British-ruled India. This move eventually facilitated Gopalan’s journey to the U.S., where she pursued biomedical science at the University of California, Berkeley a step that played a foundational role in shaping Harris’s future political aspirations.
The Washington Blade since Election Day has spoken with several LGBTQ+ activists and influencers in India.
Harish Iyer, a plaintiff in one of India’s marriage equality cases, in response to Trump’s election said the “path for queer liberation has never been straight.”
“The presidential election was filled with rhetoric from the Republican side against transgender persons,” said Iyer. “There has been a complete denial of the existence of transgender people and also widespread ignominy and ostracism. This, adding to the overturn of Roe vs. Wade, has aggravated tensions for everyone from gender variant persons to birthing parents of all genders.”
He further noted there is a strong change of more transphobic legislation and rhetoric in the U.S. with Trump in the White House, Republicans in control of the U.S. Senate and the U.S. House of Representatives, and a conservative majority on the U.S. Supreme Court.
“In a largely connected world, where many Indians and India-born people are in America, the effect of this will be palpable in India too,” said Iyer.
Indrani Chakraborty is a prominent social activist and advocate for transgender rights, particularly in northeast India. She has been outspoken about the challenges faced by her trans daughter.
Chakraborty said the effects will be felt around the world if Trump continues his transphobic rhetoric and the U.S. government does not support the LGBTQ+ community. Anwesh Kumar Sahoo, an Indian artist, writer, model, and the youngest winner of Mr. Gay World 2016, told the Blade that Trump’s policies are a setback in the ongoing fight for LGBTQ+ rights and visibility.
“It’s a strong reminder of how interconnected our struggles are globally,” said Sahoo. “It highlights the importance of standing up for equality everywhere.”
Abhijit Iyer Mitra, an LGBTQ+ activist and senior fellow at the Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies, in response to Harris’s loss said her Indian roots “really do not matter.”
“America expects assimilation and not just integration,” said Mitra. “She has no real connect to India in any sense or knowledge of India in any sense. So, being from here absolutely means nothing. She is American through and through, she has demonstrated no knowledge of India, no nothing, so it is what it is.”
“I am not really worried, certainly not from an Indian point of view because her particular political supporters are all viciously anti-India, but not Biden,” added Mitra. “Biden is pro-India. But Kamala, especially her supporters, belongs to the same woke circuit which would be… ‘Oh India … genocide happening’ etc. So just being Indian means nothing.”
While responding to the Trump campaign’s rhetoric on trans issues, Mitra said “the issue is not the transgender community, but the forcing of gender ideology on everyone, where you put kids on puberty blockers and have irreversible surgery done, and kids taken away from their parents.”
“I thought I was a girl when I was a kid,” said Mitra. “When I grew up, I realized that I was a man. I am very comfortable being who I am and thank God none of this happened. Had this happened now, I would have been taken away from my parents, asked to undergo surgery, and would not have been able to lead the life I am leading.”
“What is being propagated as this ‘trans ideology’ or ‘gender ideology’ is essentially homophobia, where you are told a man cannot be attracted to a man. A woman cannot be attracted to a woman. They are instead pushed to undergo irreversible sex changes and become something else,” added Mitra. “This is exactly what Iran does — they punish homosexuality with death, but if you have a sex change, it is considered acceptable.”
“There is nothing pro-LGBTQ about the Democrats — far from it. It is an LGBTQ genocide. It is erasing the viability of the LGBTQ community. It is a huge disservice to gender dysmorphic individuals, who are the ones who might genuinely need surgery. But why do they need surgery? It is because they are shunned by society and forced to undergo something that no one should have to endure,” said Mitra. “They need to be accepted and loved for who they are, not turned into something society demands them to be.”
Sarah McBride, a Democrat from Delaware, on Election Day became the first openly trans person elected to Congress. Biden, former President Barack Obama, California Gov. Gavin Newsom, and Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker are among those who specifically mentioned marriage equality and other LGBTQ+ rights during the 2024 Democratic National Convention in Chicago.
“Kamala’s defeat is a huge setback for our friends from the LGBTQ community in the U.S.,” Kalki Subramaniam, an activist, queer artist, and actor who is a member of India’s National Transgender Council, told the Blade.
“As a Tamil woman from Kamala’s mother’s state, I am disappointed that Kamala was not elected,” added Subramaniam. “As Kamala said, never give up and burn bright. For all my LGBTQ families around the world, let us support more leaders like Kamala Harris and strengthen them. Let us step forward and take leadership to win back all our rights.”
California Politics
What does Measure G mean for Los Angeles County?
L.A. County makes historic strides toward achieving more government accountability and representation
Measure G campaign declares victory, making way for pivotal and significant reform in Los Angeles County and ushering in a new era of accountability. Voters in favor of the measure hope to see a transformation of the bureaucratic system and more valid representation from the additional board supervisor seats.
“With the passage of Measure G, we are advancing a vision of Los Angeles County that prioritizes transparency, accountability and equitable representation. This measure gives a voice to communities that have often been overlooked, creating a governance structure that truly reflects our diverse County,” said Nichelle Henderson, president of the Los Angeles Community College District.
This measure made history, declaring victory after gaining majority approval from voters. This measure makes history after various attempts to expand the LA County Board of Supervisors failed in 1962, 1976, 1992 and again in 2000.
The measure will now require County departments and agencies to present their budgets to the Board in open, public meetings, prior to adoption of annual budgets, effective immediately.
The “revolving door,” policy prohibiting former County officials from lobbying the County for a minimum of two years after leaving office, will now be strengthened, effective immediately.
Elected officials who are criminally convicted of a crime will be suspended without pay, also effective immediately.
The measure will establish and create an independent Ethics Commission, as well as an Office of Ethics Compliance, led by an Ethics Compliance Officer by 2026.
Under the measure, a County Executive will be elected in 2028 and the Board of Supervisors will nearly double in size by 2032, following the 2030 independent redistricting process.
The motion was originally co-authored by LA County Board Chair Lindsey Horvath and Supervisor Janice Hahn, with the support of Supervisor Hilda L. Solis. Horvath and Solis argued that five people could not effectively represent such a large and diverse population, while Supervisors Holly Mitchell and Kathryn Barger panned the move as rushed and ill-conceived.
LA County residents have affirmed that the way forward lies in a complete transformation of the County’s governance. Now that it’s been approved, the measure will add true checks and balances through a more representative legislative branch and executive branch with direct accountability to voters.
“We will now have the ability to fix what is broken and deliver the results our communities are counting on, especially in the face of threats to our most vulnerable residents from the next federal administration,” said Horvath.
“Through this historic change, we will address the most pressing issues facing Angelenos with greater urgency and accountability, and create a more ethical and representative government fit for the 21st century.”
The approval of this measure made history because previous attempts to change the county’s charter failed, while Measure G was approved through broad-based support from nurses, small businesses, civil rights groups and state–as well as–federal leaders from throughout the county.
The academic community responded to the approval of the measure, which is set to be enshrined into the L.A. County Charter shortly after it is certified by the L.A. County Registrar-Recorder on December 3, 2024.
“This historic victory gives voice to communities who have long been marginalized in the decision-making process,” said Sara Sadhwani, Ph.D., professor of politics at Pomona College. “With a more transparent and responsive governance structure, we’re creating a County government that truly reflects the diversity and needs of its people. This is a win for democracy and for all Angelenos.”
Politics
Will Rollins loses razor-close race for Republican Ken Calvert’s House seat
Gay Democrat lost to anti-LGBTQ+ Republican
A major, late-breaking U.S. House of Representatives race was called on Wednesday for the anti-LGBTQ+ Republican, U.S. Rep. Ken Calvert, who with his victory managed to stave off a second attempt by gay former U.S. Attorney Will Rollins to flip the 30+ year incumbent’s seat representing California’s 41st Congressional District.
The results all but extinguished the Democratic Party’s prospects of regaining control of the House, a stinging blow that comes a week after Republicans won the White House and retook their U.S. Senate majority.
Given how narrow the margin in their race was expected to be, and how narrow the House Republican majority was heading into the election, a lot of money was poured into the contest for CA-41.
While final vote counts have not yet been reported, their race was close, as was expected this year and as it was in 202 after Calvert’s district was redrawn to include the city of Palm Springs, a heavily Democratic area with a sizable LGBTQ+ population.
Endeavoring to reposition himself as a friend to the community, the congressman subsequently embraced some pro-LGBTQ+ policies such as by voting for the Respect for Marriage Act, which codified legal protections for married same-sex couples
Critics including Rollins said his “evolution” was insincere and opportunistic, pointing to Calvert’s anti-LGBTQ+ moves after 2022, like striking funds in an appropriations bill that had been earmarked for three LGBTQ+ centers.
Politics
Dems must not abandon trans people after Trump’s win: Kierra Johnson
LGBTQ advocates prepared for all outcomes ahead of election
As Democrats look inward following Vice President Kamala Harris’s electoral defeat, the party must not abandon transgender people or cede the fight to expand rights and protections for the community, National LGBTQ Task Force Action Fund President Kierra Johnson told the Washington Blade.
President-elect Donald Trump’s campaign, and those run by other Republican candidates, spent tens of millions on anti-trans ads leading up to the election, a messaging strategy that has been credited with energizing the conservative base and ultimately defeating Democrats like U.S. Rep. Colin Allred (D-Texas), who ran for Ted Cruz’s (R-Texas) U.S. Senate seat.
Others doubt whether the issue had much, if any, impact on the elections, especially the presidential race — arguing that the results are better explained by headwinds like the post-pandemic disadvantage faced by incumbent leaders around the world, or by the realignment of the American electorate that decisively sent Trump back to the White House.
When she was at Howard University on Wednesday to watch Harris deliver her concession speech, Johnson said she was asked twice whether “the alignment around trans rights was a part of the problem” or whether Harris was doomed by her campaign’s failure to distance the vice president from President Joe Biden. Her response: “God, no.”
Broadly, she said, “it’s pointless to be in this space of, ‘what could the Harris campaign have done differently’ when we’re operating in this context” where authoritarianism and fascism have taken hold while sexism, racism, homophobia, transphobia, anti-immigrant bigotry, and other forms of prejudice are now expressed so openly.
Plus, Johnson added, the vice president “had, what, 107 days of a campaign? And she got that close — that’s pretty damn amazing.”
Challenging the theory that the anti-trans advertising was effective, she said, is (1) the success of so many LGBTQ candidates like Delaware State Sen. Sarah McBride, who made history with her election to become the first transgender member of Congress, and (2) the fact that Trump and his allies did not just leverage anti-trans messaging in their campaigns, but also leaned into other forms of bigotry, from fear mongering about immigrant communities to racist attacks focused on Harris’s biracial identity.
NBC News reported on Friday that hundreds of LGBTQ candidates were elected to public office across the U.S., and many races have not yet been called. According to the LGBTQ+ Victory Fund, the number of known LGBTQ people who ran this year, 1,017, marks a 1.1 percent increase from 2020, with more non-cisgender candidates running than ever before.
About 80 percent have been successful. Several, like McBride, have made history. For instance, Hawaii, Iowa, and Missouri will welcome the first transgender representatives to their state legislatures, Kim Coco Iwamoto, Aime Wichtendahl, and Wick Thomas.
“When I see this many trans people who were voted by the people into elected office, some who were reelected into office, I’m hard pressed to believe that that was the winning strategy,” Johnson said, pointing to wins by other trans candidates in Minnesota, Kentucky, New Jersey, and Illinois.
“The Trump campaign had a lot of bigotry, throughout the first campaign, continuing on till now, that was anti-Black, anti-immigrant, anti-woman, anti-queer, anti-trans,” she said, adding, “There’s an appetite for that kind of racist, bigoted way of doing and being. They did a whole lot of that. And, yeah, I think it spoke to a particular part of their base — and I don’t think that that was about us, what we did or didn’t do right.”
Dividing the Democratic coalition is a losing strategy
“It’s really easy for us to point our fingers at conservatives, right-of-center [folks] or Trumpers or Tea Partiers,” she said. “But it’s harder for us to admit and talk about racism” and other forms of discrimination and prejudice “that is existent and perpetuated in left, leftist parties and left communities and organizations that are doing social justice work.”
“When I hear people who identify as Democrats saying we need to distance ourselves from trans people and perpetuating this notion that that’s why we lost,” Johnson said, “that is transphobia among leftist political people” and evidence of the need to root out and combat it.
“We’ve got to start building our strategies with our whole community intact,” she said. “Not how we’re going to do this without trans people. Not how we’re going to do this without, you know, evangelical Black people. Not how we’re going to do this without people in the Midwest and the Rust Belt or the Bible Belt. Not how we’re going to do this without immigrants.”
Each of those approaches would alienate critical parts of the Democratic base, Johnson said.
Beyond the work of electing pro-equality candidates, she said the movement and the Democratic Party must “affirm the humanity of all of us and build strategies that put the most vulnerable at the center,” which “means we have to question how things have always been done” along with the systems that were not originally designed to accommodate the full diversity of people they serve.
“Part of it is about representation,” Johnson said, “the presence of non-binary, trans, queer people in the work, in ads, in media. But it’s also a power analysis” that involves, or requires, talking “about trans people not as a separate community of people, but part of the different communities we are in.”
For example, trans people are experiencing the struggle for affordable housing as much as anyone else, she said. “Regardless of the work that we’re doing — prison reform, voting rights, housing access — put our people at the center, trans people at the center, as yet another voice that is a part of that whole.”
The success of LGB and queer and trans candidates last week, and the protections for LGBTQ people and women’s reproductive freedoms in ballot measures that passed in states like New York, were important, Johnson said.
At the same time, “what I want people to understand,” she said, “is we’ve got to move beyond identity politics and representation and really think about how we are building power. So with these wins, how are we leveraging them for gained power in our communities? We’ve got to be working overtime to come up with the pathways and strategies to leverage that power toward progress for our whole community.”
LGBTQ movement ready for incoming administration
When asked to share a message for the LGBTQ community in the wake of the election, Johnson said “we’ve got to create space and time to feel and heal,” but “we also have to find our organizations, our community partners, our friend groups that we can actually dig in with to get the work done.”
“You have every reason to be mad, sad, confused, frustrated,” she said, “but do not be helpless.”
Johnson added, “Our communities have been resilient through decades, centuries. And that perspective is important. While we are in hard times, our ancestors and foreparents created a lot of progress, and now we’re called to do the same. We have a responsibility to do the same.”
“A lot of our peers didn’t make it to be freedom fighters,” she said, but “we have. Let’s step into that power.”
While LGBTQ advocacy groups, including the Task Force, are expected to lose their seats at the table once the Trump-Vance administration takes over in January, Johnson told the Blade, “That’s all good, because the power is actually in the people anyway.”
“Access to the White House, influence in the White House, is important,” she said, but “that’s never been the end-all-be-all. We know that power is built from the grassroots up, and so that just gives us more time to organize and strategize with our people on the ground.”
“Bring it,” Johnson added. “We’ve got powerful, powerful voices. Folks who are in Texas and in Michigan and Ohio, that that are ready. They’re ready to dig in, to keep this fight going — and to fight smarter, and in a broader, bigger coalition.”
“While we couldn’t have predicted exactly where we were going to be today, the Task Force and other organizations in the LGBTQ movement have been doing scenario planning for months,” she said, “so we’re not caught with our pants down. We’ve run scenarios, and we are already moving to implement different strategies in the communities that we’re working in.”
Johnson highlighted the Task Force’s flagship “Creating Change” conference in Las Vegas from Jan. 22 to 26, where the organization will be “bringing together legal minds to actually do, basically, office hours on-site,” allowing attendees the opportunity to consult attorneys with questions about their rights and protections under the next administration.
“It’s not about advocacy,” she said. “It’s about taking care of our people. I think you’re going to see more of that — in addition to the policy and advocacy work, more is going to be done to actually hold and support and protect our people.”
Politics
HRC’s Brandon Wolf reflects on Trump’s victory, path ahead for LGBTQ movement
He joined the Blade for a conversation on Rated LGBT Radio
Human Rights Campaign National Press Secretary Brandon Wolf and Washington Blade White House reporter Christopher Kane spoke with Rated LGBT Radio on Thursday, following Donald Trump’s victory over Vice President Kamala Harris.
They covered subjects ranging from the impact of anti-trans advertising by the former president’s campaign and other Republican candidates in down-ballot races to the future of the Democratic Party and what lies ahead for organizations in the LGBTQ movement.
Prior to joining HRC, Wolf served as press secretary for Equality Florida. A survivor of the 2016 Pulse nightclub shooting in Orlando, he is recognized for his work in LGBTQ advocacy, public speaking and media appearances, and his critically acclaimed 2023 memoir “A Place for Us.”
The conversation has been edited for length and clarity.
MODERATOR: What is the mood at HRC and what are leaders and staff saying?
BRANDON WOLF: Like millions of people, the folks at HRC are heartbroken. I know I can speak for myself in saying that I am most heartbroken for those who have had their humanity questioned for years by Donald Trump and the MAGA movement. I’m most heartbroken for those who have been in the crosshairs, who have seen their freedoms and rights stripped away in state after state, in places like Texas and Tennessee and Florida. I’m heartbroken for the families who have been terrorized by their political leaders for years because of the kind of environment that people like Donald Trump have created, and I’m heartbroken for all the people who aren’t sure what happens next, the people who’ve listened to Donald Trump’s words, who’ve seen the ads that he’s run, who’ve read through Project 2025 and are deeply concerned about what happens next for themselves and their families.
This is a really challenging time, and the obstacles we’re facing are incredibly difficult, but we’ve also been here before as a community. I think about our ancestors a lot. I think about when we were being beaten and brutally assaulted by police officers, we fought back at Stonewall, and birthed a movement when people were dying by the 1,000s of AIDS and leaders refused to acknowledge that pain and suffering. We fought back, we formed Act Up, and we brought ourselves to this moment in time where we have the opportunity to potentially end that epidemic in our lifetime. We have been in incredibly challenging circumstances before, and at every one of those moments, we’ve locked arms with each other. We’ve chosen to get through it together. We dared ourselves to imagine what’s possible when we finally overcome those hurdles, and at every one of those moments, we have been successful. We’ve made progress happen. So, I’m heartbroken by the results of the election, but I’m certainly not feeling broken today.
MODERATOR: What are you hearing from LGBTQ groups you’ve spoken with in terms of their reaction to the election?
CHRISTOPHER KANE: The remarks that we just heard from Brandon actually echo what I heard earlier from Kierra Johnson, who’s the president of the LGBTQ Task Force and Task Force Action Fund. She was saying how we have this rich history as a community of activism, and how brave our forebears have been and how many of our brothers and sisters lost their lives defending our rights.
Something that I think these advocacy groups will be thinking about is what the next administration might cost [them], in terms of their access to levers of power. To what extent is the Trump administration going to work with these groups? And that means kind of a change in strategy, because the focus becomes, you know, political organizing and a lot of the other work that’s so important that these groups are engaged in, right? You know, whether it’s going out into the field and helping people get, in our community, get exactly what they need, Whether it’s providing legal resources for folks, in light of what we’re going to see in terms of regulatory and legal changes over the next administration. So there’s just so much work to be done.
[Note: Johnson told the Blade that Task Force and the other movement groups had been “doing scenario planning for months” to prepare for all possible outcomes, and together are already “moving to implement different strategies in the communities that we’re working in.”]
MODERATOR: It seems the Trump campaign sought to divide the community between LGB people on one side and trans and nonbinary communities on the other. VP-elect J.D. Vance saying, for example, that the ‘normal gay guy’ vote would break in their favor.
WOLF: First, I’m loath to let J.D. Vance tell anybody what normal is supposed to be. But the truth is, the data does not bear out that they won any significant part of the LGBTQ+ community. Exit polls show that people in the community backed Harris over Donald Trump by a 70 point margin, 84 to 14. That margin is second only to Black women in support of Vice President Harris. So, the LGBTQ+ community continues to be a very reliable part of the Democratic coalition, and I think that is because of a couple of things: Number one, we understand what’s at stake. We understand what we have to lose in these elections. We understand what we’re up against in Donald Trump. And number two, in Kamala Harris and [her VP pick, Minnesota Gov.] Tim Walz, we had real champions for our community — career-long champions who were doing the work of equality even before that was, maybe, politically advantageous or easy for them to do. It was Kamala Harris who was performing some of the first same-sex marriages in California when the country was having a debate over whether or not we should be able to get married at all. It was Tim Walz who, in the late ’90s, as a football coach, was the sponsor of the Gay-Straight Alliance club at his high school.
So, I think you saw that drive turnout in the LGBTQ+ community. That number expands when you get into some of these highly competitive battleground states. In Arizona, equality voters, who are people who prioritize LGBTQ+ equality when deciding who to vote for, equality voters backed Democratic candidates by a 92 to seven margin. So, again, we’re talking about a community that understands what’s at stake, and really showed up in this election cycle.
The other thing I want to address is, you’re talking about the MAGA agenda of driving people apart from each other. This is the old playbook. This is the right-wing playbook that they use every single time. And it’s because the MAGA agenda is not one that is designed to bring people together. MAGA candidates and campaigns don’t have a vision for our country. They don’t fundamentally believe in a multi-racial, multi-generational democracy, and so the only thing they have to offer the American people is division, chaos and hate. They pit neighbors against each other. They turn one community against another. They dare us to build higher walls and taller fences, because so long as we’re fighting with each other, we won’t find the time or the resources to organize against them collectively. And so that is what they have to offer us, this agenda of chaos, division, and hate, and that is what they’ve been trying throughout the election cycle, instead of offering policy proposals to help people address the cost of housing or groceries, instead of offering offering real comprehensive conversations on immigration reform, for instance, they serve up hate and xenophobia and transphobia and general bigotry. So, I think we have to be wary of falling into that same trap.
We’re going to spend years dissecting the election and figuring out how to build a winning coalition moving forward, but I can tell you that scapegoating trans people in this moment is not going to help us build the path forward. I think at HRC, I can speak for us that you know our job is to be in community with those other organizations. We’ve already been having conversations throughout the election cycle with our progressive partners, people in the labor space, people in the immigrant rights space, people in the civil rights space, the voting rights space, certainly the reproductive freedom space and others. We have to keep those conversations going. We have to make sure that we’re building a plan and a strategy that organizes communities across issue areas, and ultimately, we’re going to have to be united. We have to be a united front in defense of democracy and freedom and our basic civil liberties.
KANE: As Brandon said, first of all, the exit polls show that this strategy of dividing communities didn’t work, and it should come as no surprise, because [Brandon is] exactly right — that’s not how to win. We’re much stronger together.
It’s only been, what, less than 48 hours, right, since the election was called? We still have to collect a lot of information, and there’s plenty of time for reflection and recrimination and everything else to figure out exactly what happened here. To the extent possible. But I think one thing worth probing is whether the spend by Republicans on anti-trans advertising had any effect. And I think that’s something that’s perhaps worth looking into and maybe examining what would be the best way to respond to those anti-trans commercials. Should the campaign have done more to address it directly? Should they have pivoted to an economic message and said, you know, Republicans want to focus on [going after trans people] at the expense of improving materially the lives of the American people? You know, there are a lot of directions you could take that, but I think it’s worth revisiting in the future when we have more information.
MODERATOR: At Equality Florida, you fought against the extreme anti-LGBTQ laws passed under Gov. Ron DeSantis (R). How should the community prepare for or respond to those policies if or when they are introduced at the federal level after Trump takes office?
WOLF: Project 2025 is horrifying, but it’s not all that surprising if you’ve been living its beta test for years, and people in places like Florida and Texas and Tennessee have indeed been living this beta test of Project 2025. I think the next steps come in phases in my mind. And I would say, we start with community. We have to take care of our people. I’ve been at several of these inflection points when bad legislation is passing and leaders are trafficking in dehumanizing language, and the first thing we do is is reach out to people and ask what they need. I know that that’s what we’re going to be doing at HRC. We’ve got some plans in place to be with community, gathering information, listening, hearing what folks need. We’ve already put out a number of mental health resources that people can get access to. So, in these really difficult moments, we have to start with community. I’ve been in some really dark moments in my life, and in those moments, I didn’t know that the next day was worth living for, but it was community that reminded me I had to get up and fight every single day. We’re going to need that community right now more than ever.
The second thing I would say is we have the same rights today as we did when polls closed on Tuesday. In fact, we have the same congressional makeup today as we did when polls close on Tuesday. And there’s work to be done so long as we have control over the White House [and] a pro-equality majority in the Senate. There are things that we can do. I know that we’re having conversations internally with the administration to see where we can safeguard and shore up people’s access to freedoms and rights. We’ve got to do that work during the lame duck session.
And finally, I think we have work to do once Donald Trump is inaugurated. We’re going to have to work with Congress to try to blunt some of the attacks that will come through the legislative branch. We’re going to have to work with governors and state legislatures to try to safeguard people’s freedoms and protections on the state level. And we’re going to have to work with our foundation, our educational programs, to change the culture, to humanize people. So often we can get lost in the political rancor. People become talking points. It’s our job to put human faces and stories behind the policies that we’re debating, and we’re going to have to do that — whether it’s, you know, in classrooms, talking to young people about the kind of future they want for themselves and their peers, or whether it’s workplaces, challenging companies to make their values more than just a dusty poster on a wall, but living, breathing values that make people’s lives fundamentally better. So, it’s going to take a whole of organization, a whole-of-community approach, to resist Donald Trump, but I don’t want us to skip past the part where we we take care of each other first for a second.
MODERATOR: Reactions to Delaware State Sen. Sarah McBride’s victory in her race for the state’s at-large seat in the U.S. House, which distinguishes her as the first transgender candidate elected to Congress?
WOLF: You’re spot on when you’re talking about the power that Sarah has, and I don’t want to lose that. You know, Tuesday was a rough night in the presidential, and certainly did not go the way we wanted it to in other races, but we can’t lose sight of the historic wins that we got either. Sarah McBride’s victory is groundbreaking for people. There are trans kids out there who are wondering whether or not this country loves them, who will look up and see Sarah McBride’s face on a television screen and believe that they can be whoever they want to be. That really matters. When we say representation matters, that’s what representation really looks like.
And when you’re talking about the story that Sarah tells just by walking the halls or or giving speeches from the floor, don’t forget that Sarah did not just win this race for Congress. She dominated in the primary field because of her record of service. She cleared that field very early on. Adnd then in the general election, she garnered the highest support among any other Democrat running in Delaware, except for one, the insurance commissioner. We’re going to have to dissect how that happened. But, you know, we’re talking about Sarah McBride getting more votes, you know, than folks running for governor and for Senate. So Sarah is a gravitational pull right now in Delaware politics, she is a groundbreaking win for the community, and it matters that she got there by being an incredibly talented champion for her constituents.
And so, to answer your question, yes, we have to tell the story of why Sarah McBride’s race is historic, why her serving is groundbreaking. And we have to tell the story of how Sarah got there, that she got there by doing really good, hard, work. By connecting with her constituents. By delivering results for people every single day. That’s what it looks like to be successful. And when we tell those full, rich stories of all that people are, that’s when we see them as human, right?
I think we can do such a better job in the media and in digital social media spaces [of] telling the rich fullness of people’s lives. I want to hear the stories of the trans business owners. The trans parents. I want to hear the story of the trans woman who just graduated from law school. I want to hear those rich, full stories, and that’s how we chart a new path.
KANE: I agree with everything Brandon said. You know, I’ll add that when I interviewed President Biden at the end of September, one of the things we talked about was Sarah McBride. And he said something, I wish I had the exact words in front of me, but it was something like, ‘Sarah’s going to be, I pray to God, a member of Congress.’ And I think he understood and understands and was communicating just the unbelievable power of having a transgender woman serving in the United States Congress, and everything that that means.
And it’s not, of course, just that she’s elected and is serving there, but it’s the work that she’s going to be doing when she gets there. And, you know, Sarah is the real deal. She’s so widely respected and for her work, I mean, as a state senator in Delaware, she was very effective in securing a bill that provided paid family leave for people in Delaware. So, she’s just been very effective, and, again, very widely respected.
MODERATOR: The Trump-Vance administration will bring an influx of insiders — lobbyists, staffers, attorneys, advisers — to Washington. When contending with new policies concerning LGBTQ rights, how critical will it be to work with those folks, and what does that look like?
KANE: I just had a conversation with a senior employee at a federal government agency, and I was asking her about what the transition process looks like. I’ve never covered a presidential transition, but the process is more or less consistent and tends to work in the same way each time. You have folks that are eager to make their ins and make inroads at various agencies, and they have their eye on various jobs.
And then there’s a lot of, I think especially with this crowd, frankly, a lot of people knifing each other. There are warring factions. Also so that’s something that we need to understand, like within the Republican Party and even within Trump’s closest group of aides, there was conflict. A lot of conflict. So, ultimately, yes, of course, like it comes down to the people that are really effectuating these policies and and also the question, of course, of how effective they can be, especially where there’s a lot of dysfunction. And I think we can probably expect to see — as much as we’ve been promised that this administration is going to be a lot smoother, and he knows what he’s doing this time — I think based on the reporting about how his campaign went, that we can expect a lot of dysfunction.
WOLF: I will cosign that and say, you know, one of the things that people warned about Trump’s Project 2025 plan all along was this idea of purging the federal government and replacing dedicated career public servants with Trump acolytes. And what that would mean for those levers of power, right? You think about people like Stephen Miller and Steve Bannon and the devastating impact they had the first time, you can just imagine a federal, you know, government full of people like Stephen Miller and Steve Bannon, with very few people there to act as a check and a balance.
Your second point is so important to me, Chris, which is about dysfunction. When you put unqualified, incompetent people in important positions, then systems and structures break down, right? You’re talking about putting Elon Musk in charge of anything — I’m not sure he knows how government works, and it concerns me that he would be overseeing large government agencies that have complicated functions that impact people’s daily lives. You’re talking about some of these other people that just have no background in public administration. They don’t know how these agencies are supposed to function, and you’re putting them in positions because they’re a pal or they’re a yes man. That’s incredibly dangerous, that the federal government plays a critical role in people’s everyday lives, and putting incompetent people in these positions could do real damage.
KANE: And it’s even hard when they put people in there that are really competent, because — this is part of the conversation I was having earlier today — it’s even hard for the most qualified people, because it is such a short timeframe to learn everything about the way the institution is run, whether it’s the Justice Department, State Department, or whatever. [New appointees and officials have to learn] everything from where the bathrooms are and how many employees are there to, you know, what are the active investigations that the outgoing administration is going to put in your hands? So you can imagine that having somebody in there that doesn’t know what they’re doing. I mean, you can imagine, right?
MODERATOR: How are LGBTQ movement organizations looking at the threat posed by Trump’s appointment of more judges on the federal bench?
WOLF: We’ve seen the devastating impact, not just on the Supreme Court level, but across the judiciary of Trump stacking the court system with his acolytes and, again, sometimes it is incompetence. We saw that with the judge down in Florida, where she just didn’t really know the basic functions of the job, and clearly had been put there to help influence cases in a direction that someone like Donald Trump might like.
And then, you know, you look at some things that are maybe more sinister, which is this bench of candidates that organizations like the Heritage Foundation and the Alliance Defending Freedom have groomed for these positions to use their roles as judges to reshape the United States of America legally and culturally. We saw the impact of that, obviously, most infamously with the Dobbs v. Jackson decision that overturned Roe v Wade. There, you had these candidates who had been hand picked and groomed through the system, through the right wing system, who got up there, lied to the Senate committee, said that Roe v Wade was decided precedent, that there would be no reason to go back on that kind of precedent. Yet [they were confirmed and seated] and immediately [went] after Roe v Wade protections and precedent.
We’re in a very precarious position with a President Donald Trump and a Senate majority who could further stack the judiciary. And then you look at the threat on the Supreme Court. There’s a very real possibility that he could, you know, harass one or two justices into leaving and replace them with 40-year-old candidates that have been groomed and hand picked and cement a conservative majority on the Supreme Court for a very long time to come. So I think that’s why people named, in the beginning, the threat that Trump posed to the courts. That’s why it was a part of people’s pitch during the election cycle. And we’re up against some real challenges with him nominating judges.
KANE: I’m nodding in agreement. Kevin Jennings, the CEO of Lambda Legal, made the point recently that if she serves as long as Ruth Bader Ginsburg did, [Trump-appointed] Justice Amy Coney Barrett would leave the court in, I think he said, 2049. We’re talking like generational impact in terms of the rightward shift of the judiciary that we’re going to see in the next administration.
The [incoming] Trump administration is expected to be able to appoint, I believe, roughly as many judges as the Biden administration did, and as many as the [first] Trump administration did. I believe the first Trump administration also perhaps set a record — or, if not, came close — in the number of judges on the federal bench that they appointed. So we’re about to see massive, massive changes throughout the country. And, you know, it really matters who these judges are. They’re deciding things that affect our everyday lives for people across the United States.
MODERATOR: How are the LGBTQ movement organizations thinking about the makeup of the federal judiciary in the context of their legal strategy following Trump’s inauguration?
WOLF: I don’t want to get ahead of our legal team on what potential litigation tactics might look like, but I will say they know the law really well. They’re very savvy about understanding the ways in which discriminatory policies violate the law. They’re really good at helping to tell that story in courtrooms across the country, and every case is very different. So it is likely that there will be a lot of strategizing in the months and years to come.
MODERATOR: Over the past few years, a number of Democratic governors have made refuge for trans people who live in other (redder) states that have anti-trans laws and healthcare restrictions on the books. This week, many of those same governors pledged to resist a number of the incoming administration’s proposed policies. Where does that leave LGBTQ folks?
WOLF: We can’t deny that that’s happening to people, that they have been forced from their homes. I know plenty of people that I love and care about a lot who have made the really difficult decision to leave their homes. There was a trans woman that I used to work with in Florida who. through tears, called me one day and said, ‘if you see a GoFundMe on my Facebook page, it’s so that I can save enough to rent a U-Haul, put all my stuff in it, and I’ll just drive until I find somewhere that’s safer.’ Those kinds of stories are heartbreaking, and they’re already happening around this country. Trans people are made into refugees in their own states.
And I also think we can’t lose sight of the fact that some people just can’t do that, right? It’s too complicated for them to move. Maybe they’re taking care of a family member, or they have kids that are enrolled in school, or they can’t afford it. Maybe they’re in a home that their families had for generations, and they don’t want to leave it behind. People deserve to be treated with dignity and respect they deserve to have their humanity respected in their home. That’s what I get so passionate about, is that people should not be forced — in order to get the basics, the fundamental freedoms that they deserve simply on the basis of being a human being.
It’s going to be our job to, one. help to expand protections [for trans people that were passed in some blue states]. Minnesota is a great example. Under Governor Walz’s leadership, they’ve become a refuge for people who are seeking health care access. It’s going to be our job to help support those states and expand their footprint to give people as many options as possible, and it’s going to be our job to help get resources and support to people who are in states where they are facing the highest hurdles.
MODERATOR: Trump has promised to disband the U.S. Department of Education. He and his allies support anti-LGBTQ curriculum restrictions, book bans, etc. What are your concerns with the incoming administration’s approach to education?
WOLF: Project 2025 is a 900+-page manifesto of terrifying things, and this might be one of the most terrifying among them, which is the complete dismantling of our public education system. Just for reference for folks, as a society, we’ve decided that education K through 12 is a right, and that everyone should be able to have access to it, because it helps us build a better society together, that young people deserve to be able to go to school to get an education so they can go out and be the thriving adults they deserve to be.
The MAGA agenda stands in opposition to that idea that everyone should have access to education in that way, and it is in part because education poses a threat to the MAGA agenda. The more people know about who we are as a country and who we’ve been, the more they ask questions about who we want to be in the future. The more access they have to different kinds of communities and different lived experiences. The more compassionate they are to those lived experiences.
And MAGA can’t have that. Their agenda, again, is built on division and chaos and hate, and so they work to dismantle the education system. They work to influence young people by destroying their access to one of their most fundamental rights in this country. Dismantling the Department of Education would be disastrous for people, and I want people to maybe consider what it would mean for folks in everyday life. Schools are not just a place to learn, they’re a place where young people are for long periods of the day. Everything that they interact with while they’re at school impacts who they grow up to be. And families rely on schools to keep their kids safe, to make sure their kids are treated with dignity and respect, to make sure they get a good education. So disrupting the education system in this country would be absolutely devastating for families all over the place, and especially so for LGBTQ+ young people, many of whom don’t have a safe space outside of the classroom where they spend so many hours of the day.
MODERATOR: What is your advice for LGBTQ people, including young queer and trans people, who are worried?
KANE: As a journalist, I am poorly positioned to answer such a question, especially relative to someone in the advocacy or political organizing space, or someone with experience in social work and mental health. It’s not an easy question. I would encourage folks to look out for their personal welfare and the welfare of their families and friends, to lean on other people, and to avail themselves of the resources provided by LGBTQ movement groups like HRC.
WOLF: Especially for trans and non binary folks, things feel really daunting, for good reason. As someone who’s been on the front lines in Florida before and has seen these things firsthand, the first thing I would recommend is feel all the feelings. I have routines on days where I’m feeling all the feelings. Everybody has their routine, but you have to allow yourself to feel it. Sometimes the temptation is to bury yourself in work or to become numb to it, or try to tell yourself that your feelings aren’t valid or that you’re overreacting, but you have to feel all the feelings.
And the second thing is what Chris said, which is to lean on people around you. As I mentioned, I’ve been through some pretty dark times in my own journey, and on the days where I wasn’t sure that tomorrow was worth waking up for, it was the little things. It was somebody offering a shoulder to cry on. It was the woman at Publix who offered a hug even though she didn’t know what I was going through. It was the woman at the bank who offered me a tissue when I couldn’t stop crying. It was the person at a vigil who wrapped their arms around me and told me that I was loved exactly as I am. It was that sense of community that reminded me that every day is worth getting up and fighting for. We’re going to need that community in this moment. So feel all the feels. And then, as Chris said, lean into each other, do everything you can to care for each other. We’ve been through dark times. We’re in dark times again. And we’ve gotten through them before, but only together.
California Politics
Mark Gonzalez triumphs: A new era begins for Assembly District 54
Gonzalez will now represent neighborhoods in Montebello, Commerce, East L.A., Boyle Heights, Chinatown and Koreatown
LGBTQ+ Democratic candidate Mark Gonzalez wins Assembly District 54 seat against John Yi and succeeding Assemblymember Miguel Santiago (D-Los Angeles), who did not seek reelection for the position.
Both first-time candidates ran to represent one of the poorest districts in the state, with Gonzalez securing over 12,000 votes over Democrat John Yi, who ran against Gonzalez.
“Running to represent AD54 and earning the votes of those in our community, has been the honor of a lifetime,” said Gonzalez in an X post following the announcement of his win. “I remain committed to serving its people and our state as its next Assemblymember.
His opponent Yi, is the Executive Director of Los Angeles Walks, a pedestrian advocacy group and self-titled Local Nonprofit Leader. Yi is also a Democrat who championed a single-payer healthcare system that would insure all residents of California and previously advocated for the expansion of Medi-Cal benefits for all Californians, regardless of immigration status.
Gonzalez raised nearly ten times more than his opponent, who has had a history in nonprofit leadership and multiracial coalitions to promote health and justice-centered policies.
While running for Assembly, Gonzalez championed raising wages for working families, tackling LA’s homelessness and affordability crisis, and a guarantee for healthcare to all.
Gonzalez is an Assembly staffer who has served the area for over a decade, former Chair of the Los Angeles Democratic Party and Equality California Institute Board member. He worked for former Assembly Speaker John Pérez and served most recently as District Director for the current Assembly member, Miguel Santiago.
“This win is a testament to his dedication to the community and his vision for a more inclusive and equitable Los Angeles,” said Equality California’s executive director, Tony Houang. “We look forward to seeing the positive change he will bring to the Assembly and our state. On behalf of Equality California, we are excited to partner with him to continue the fight for equality and justice for all.”
As a former Chair of the L.A. County Democratic Party, Gonzalez championed change to make community college free, protect air and water quality, make housing affordable and safeguard abortion rights.
He grew up as the son of a single mother who relied on Section 8 to provide housing for them. He is a renter, organizer and activist who knows that the system as it is now, is not working towards the progress, safety or well-being of the marginalized and low-income communities of this district.
“I look forward to working with my colleagues in Sacramento to advance bold, common-sense policies that will make a meaningful impact on individuals and families across the state.”
Gonzalez will now represent District 54, will be responsible for neighborhoods in Montebello, Commerce, East L.A., Boyle Heights, Chinatown and Koreatown.
Politics
Trump wins presidency
Easily claims victory in key battleground states, smashing ‘Blue Wall’
Former President Donald Trump is set to become president-elect Donald Trump after winning Wisconsin Wednesday morning, clinching 277 of the 270 necessary electoral votes.
He will return to the White House with a Republican Senate, though control of the U.S. House of Representatives remains in limbo with many key contests too close to call.
Vice President Kamala Harris cancelled a planned appearance at her campaign’s watch party at Howard University, her alma mater, on Tuesday. As of Wednesday morning at 7 a.m., she had not yet conceded the race.
Trump pulled ahead Tuesday night with a major victory in the swing state of North Carolina and a projected win in Georgia that was later made official.
He then picked up other major battleground state wins in Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.
Reaction to the news of Trump’s win is trickling in slowly. LPAC, the nation’s only organization dedicated to advancing the political representation of LGBTQ women and nonbinary candidates, responded.
“A victory for Trump and his racist, fascist and misogynist platform is not a victory for America,” said Janelle Perez, executive director of LPAC. “Today, we mourn not only the loss of a true leader, but also the dream that Kamala Harris might be the first woman, the first woman of color, and the first South Asian person to serve as president of the United States. This is a profound loss for the country we believe in—a place where every one of us, regardless of who we are, is treated fairly and our fundamental rights are upheld.”
AIDS United expressed concern about the fight against HIV as a new Republican administration prepares to take over.
“Now, more than ever, we must act with urgency to ensure that President-Elect Donald Trump and Vice-President Elect JD Vance understand that critical services and resources that people living with HIV depend on are not to be compromised,” said Jesse Milan, Jr., president and CEO of AIDS United.
The Human Rights Campaign released a statement Wednesday morning by its president, Kelley Robinson:
“Like millions of other Americans, we’re heartbroken by the results of the presidential election, as well as the loss of other pro-equality champions across the country. We know our community is feeling scared, angry, and worried about what’s next for them and their families. We see you – there’s no question that we will face more challenges in the years to come in as part of our fight for full LGBTQ+ equality. But our ancestors taught us that resilience is our superpower. Make no mistake — we are not backing down. And we are going to continue to show up for each other and for the march toward progress — no matter what.
“Despite these disappointing results, we see undeniable proof of hope for the future. Sarah McBride, a trail-blazing champion for Delawareans, will be sworn in this January as the first ever openly transgender member of Congress. Julie Johnson, a dedicated fighter for civil rights and longtime HRC champion, will be the first ever LGBTQ+ member of Congress from the South. Emily Randall is poised to become the first Latina lesbian elected to Congress, and while many races are yet to be called, Senator Tammy Baldwin is on her way to returning to Washington alongside many other LGBTQ+ champions. Marriage equality amendments prevailed with overwhelming support in California and Colorado. And across the country, voters continued to pass ballot referendums protecting access to abortion in the face of an onslaught of misleading transphobic attacks–just the latest example that attacks on the trans community are political losers.
“For more than 40 years, HRC has been on the front lines of the fight for LGBTQ+ equality — one of the most powerful movements this country has ever seen. From Stonewall to the AIDS crisis to attacks against transgender Americans and our unwavering fight for marriage equality at the Supreme Court, the LGBTQ+ community has always persevered and defied the odds to make progress that once seemed unimaginable.
“The path ahead will be challenging, but we are prepared. We will use every tool at our disposal–from advocacy to education to litigation to campaigns–to protect our communities and advance progress where we can. We will build power by building each other up, with a dedication to forging a better path for our future. To every LGBTQ+ person feeling scared, I see you. I feel you. And I need you to hear this: You are not alone. You are loved. You are worthy. And you have an entire community standing with you, today and every day.”
Lambda Legal President Kevin Jennings released a statement:
“We won’t sugarcoat this – last night’s election results were incredibly detrimental to the cause of equality. There is no doubt that many of us feel scared, angry, and perhaps demoralized. And we are not naïve: we are entering a seriously dangerous period confronted by a new administration and at least one house of Congress that have made their hostility to our community crystal clear.
“Lambda Legal has been strategizing and planning for this possibility, and we will expend every energy to hold the line. We all know we have tough battles ahead. But we’ve overcome difficult odds repeatedly before and have won landmark victories throughout Lambda Legal’s fifty-year history. Lambda Legal successfully blocked multiple attacks by the first Trump administration, and we are ready to oppose any anti-LGBTQ+ actions this new administration takes.”
GLAAD President and CEO Sarah Kate Ellis issued a statement:
“The LGBTQ community has been here before, as have all other marginalized communities, and the pain is real today. But as we saw from the Lavender Scare to the Stonewall riots, from the HIV epidemic to the defeat and victory for marriage, every breakdown can lead to a breakthrough. We must see this moment of crisis as another catalyst for change.
“Our community knows how to take care of each other, and how to push our country and world forward. The mission remains: Hold leaders accountable to We, the People. Empower each person to use their voice for progress with kindness. Correct the record. Shape culture. Change hearts and minds. Rise up for intersectional issues including racial justice, abortion and immigration. GLAAD was founded nearly forty years ago with the knowledge that LGBTQ people and our stories would create a better world. Our work has renewed importance and urgency. LGBTQ people belong and are essential to the promise of America as a beacon of equality and acceptance.”
PFLAG National President Brian Bond released a statement:
“Today, PFLAG’s hundreds of thousands of members and supporters across the country have witnessed a devastating result for people whose loved ones have been targeted for harm by policies, disenfranchisement and worse.
“Yet, just as the LGBTQ+ people, families and allies of PFLAG have always joined the march for freedom, we are united in this fight to protect and respect every member of our community.
“Despite the many setbacks and disappointments this election represents for our community, there are many historic victories for LGBTQ+ people, families and allies to celebrate. Sarah McBride will be sworn in as the first openly transgender Member of Congress, representing Delaware. With the elections of Angela Alsobrooks and Lisa Blunt Rochester to the Senate, that body has more black women members serving together than at any other time in history. Plus, California, Colorado, and Hawaii have enshrined marriage equality for same-sex couples in their state constitutions, and eight states, including Nebraska and my home state of Missouri, have ensured access to abortion.
“Our LGBTQ+ loved ones and families are scared right now. But make no mistake, PFLAG is not backing down from this fight. For over five decades, PFLAG has been leading with love to overcome dark efforts. We are uniquely able to meet this moment, to soften hearts, to change minds, and to support our community.
“PFLAG will continue to show up for our LGBTQ+ loved ones, from the state house to the courthouse, the schoolhouse steps to the steps of the U.S. Capitol and Supreme Court. We’ve got this. We’ve got us.”
The Congressional Equality Caucus posted a statement on X: “Our fight for equality is a story of victories, setbacks, and our determination to keep moving forward. We will face this next challenge together, united in the belief that, in the long term, equality will win out & love will trump hate. We’ll never stop fighting for equality.”
National Women’s Law Center Action Fund President Fatima Goss Graves released a statement:
“This is the outcome that we feared and fought tirelessly to prevent. While it’s a dark day for our democracy, let’s remember that Donald Trump is not a king. He is not a dictator. He is one branch of our democratic government, and he and his administration can be kept in check so long as the people, our institutions, and those who hold power refuse to bow to his authoritarian tendencies.
“Millions of people in this country voted for a different future, one that protects reproductive freedom, expands affordable caregiving, and ensures our schools are safe and inclusive. These issues are core to people’s lives and the majority of people support measures that advance gender justice – you see that in the ballot measures that passed for child care and abortion access, you see that in the polling that shows overwhelming support for reproductive freedom, action on caregiving, and ensuring billionaires pay their fair share. Vice President Harris knew this, and she ran her remarkable and historic campaign in service of a safer, more equal, more free, and more just future for everyone in this country.
“Armed with insights from the Project 2025 agenda, we are prepared. We’ve navigated the challenges of a Trump administration before, and together, we will rise to face this one. The next four years will undoubtedly be difficult, but our staff remains steadfast in its determination to ensure that all women and girls have the opportunity to thrive, regardless of who holds the White House.”
The HIV + Hepatitis Policy Institute released a statement by its president, Carl Schmid:
“The American people have spoken and elected Donald Trump and JD Vance as our next president and vice president. The HIV+Hepatitis Policy Institute will work with the new administration on furthering efforts to end HIV and hepatitis in the United States. With proper leadership, policies, and funding, we can end both these infectious diseases.
“In his 2019 State of the Union address, Trump announced that we would ‘eliminate the HIV epidemic in the United States within 10 years.’ This led to the historic Ending the HIV Epidemic initiative that increases HIV testing, treatment and prevention programs, including scaling up PrEP, which are drugs that prevent HIV.
“At the same time, his administration proposed cuts to other HIV and health programs and proposed to dismantle the Affordable Care Act, including its non-discrimination protections.
“Ending HIV and hepatitis cannot happen without a comprehensive healthcare system that includes robust private insurance, Medicaid and Medicare programs, upholding non-discrimination protections, and combating stigma and disparities. Healthcare access and affordability, particularly for prescription drugs, are critically important. We will continue to fight to ensure all payers provide the drugs people need at a price they can afford. Of immediate concern for the new administration will be ensuring that copay assistance patients receive to afford their drugs will count towards their out-of-pocket cost obligations.
“We look forward to working with President-elect Trump on ensuring that the Ending the HIV Epidemic initiative is fully funded and expanded in order to fulfill the goal of ending HIV in the United States. In recent years, House Republicans have proposed to eliminate funding for the program.
“There will be many policy and funding decisions that the Trump-Vance administration must make and work with the new Congress to pass. We realize that we live in a divided country and not everyone shares the same priorities and views. However, no matter one’s views, these decisions must be based on science so that we can continue to advance the interests of people living with or at risk of HIV and hepatitis and others who live with serious and chronic health conditions.”
Rodney Croome, founder of Australian Marriage Equality, in an X post echoed the concerns of activists in the U.S.
“Australia’s LGBTIQA+ community will suffer from increased hate and from local politicians imitating Trump,” said Croome. “But the response to authoritarianism is not to retreat. It is to empower more voices, have higher expectations, create a more democratic movement and defend each other.”
California Politics
2024 Election: A short guide to California propositions
Prop 3 would ensure marriage equality in state constitution
The 2024 Election is upon us and this means that it is time to vote — if you haven’t already.
For some, voting might be confusing or daunting. For others, it might be your first time voting, whether you are now old enough to vote, recently became a citizen or were previously incarcerated and can now vote in California.
The election produces a lot of anxiety for Americans because there are a lot of issues to be determined. A poll by the American Psychological Association suggests that the future of the nation, economy, and presidential election, top U.S. stressors.
The poll also suggests that the biggest concerns are the end of Democracy and political violence.
A Stress in America 2024 report by the APA, points out that 77 percent rate the future of our nation as a significant source of stress, 69 percent cite the presidential election and 73 percent cite the economy, as a significant source of stress.
For people in the LGBTQ+, QTBIPOC, low-income, and otherwise marginalized communities in California, there are a few key issues that are at stake.
We have summarized the propositions on the California ballot.
California propositions
Proposition 2 would authorize $10 billion in bonds for upgrade, repair and construction on K-12 educational facilities, community colleges, charter school and career technical education programs. The bonds would cost California $500 million annually and have to be repaid with interest over the next 35 years.
Proposition 3 is the Constitutional Right to Marriage ballot initiative that if approved, would guarantee that same-sex and interracial marriages will continue to be valid and recognized by the California Constitution, which currently only recognizes heterosexual marriages.
This proposition would guarantee that if same-sex and interracial marriage were to be challenged on the federal level by the Supreme Court, there would be protections on the state level.
Proposition 4 would authorize bonds for safe drinking water, wildfire prevention and protecting communities from natural disasters and other climate risks. A yes vote would approve the state of California to borrow $10 billion to fund activities aimed at conserving natural resources. The bonds would have to be repaid over the next 40 years, at $400 million annually.
Proposition 5 would allow certain local bonds and related property taxes to be approved with a 55 percent vote of the local electorate, rather than the current two-thirds majority vote requirement. The bonds would have to fund local affordable housing, supportive housing and public infrastructure.
Proposition 6 would amend the California Constitution to remove current provisions that allows jails and prisons to impose involuntary servitude to punish crime. State prisons would not be allowed to punish anyone who refuses to work.
Proposition 32 would raise the minimum wage to $17 per hour for employers with more than 26 employees effective immediately and then to $18 as of Jan 1, 2025, and for employers with 25 or fewer employees, to $17 effective on Jan 1, 2025, and $18 as of Jan 1, 2026.
Proposition 33 would repeal the Costa-Hawkins Rental Housing Act of 1995, which currently places limits on local governments from enacting rent control laws. A yes vote would mean that the state would not limit the kinds of rent control laws cities and counties could or could not have. A no vote would mean the state would continue to limit the kinds of rent control laws cities and counties could have.
Proposition 34 would restrict spending of prescription drug revenued by certain health care providers by requiring providers to spend 98 percent of revenues from federal discount prescription drug programs on direct patient care. Increased state costs would likely total millions annually to enforce the new rules on health care entities.
Proposition 35 would provide funding for Medi-Cal health care services by making an existing tax on managed health care insurance plans permanent. New rules would direct how the state must use revenue.
Proposition 36 would allow felony charges for possessing certain drug types and for thefts under $950, if the defendant has two prior drug or theft convictions. This means that if approved, punishment for drug and theft crimes would increase such as longer prison sentences.
Los Angeles
Los Angeles opens nation’s first transgender vote center
Activists, local officials attended opening
In a landmark development for electoral accessibility, Los Angeles County has opened the doors to the nation’s first general election Vote Center located within a transgender establishment. The Connie Norman Transgender Empowerment Center officially launched its voting facilities today, inviting the local trans community and all registered voters in Los Angeles County to participate in the democratic process.
The Vote Center at CONOTEC will operate for early voting from Nov. 2 – Nov. 5 from 8 a.m. to 8 p.m. Registered voters in Los Angeles County can cast their ballot at CONOTEC, regardless of their residential address. This initiative not only creates a safe and affirming space for marginalized voters but also aims to foster broader community engagement.
During the grand opening, Los Angles County Registrar Dean Logan and West Hollywood Mayor John Erickson, celebrated this significant moment.
Logan said, “The county and everyone in my office know that we need to make voting as accessible and welcoming as possible in every corner of the county. The CONOTEC leadership has done a great job preparing this Vote Center, and we thank them for opening their space to their community and all of the LA County residents who chose to vote here.”
Queen Victoria Ortega (at podium), president of FLUX International, addressed the need for more action.
“We are tired of everyone discussing our safety while doing nothing about it. Now, we are taking matters into our own hands,” Ortega said. “We, the trans community, have created a safe space for the most marginalized to vote, and when you do that, you create a safe place for all. We are honored and duty-bound to be the first presidential election Vote Center in America at a transgender establishment.”
Queen Chela Demuir, executive director of the Unique Women’s Coalition, emphasized the historical legacy of trans rights activists.
“In the spirit of Marsha P. Johnson and Sylvia Rivera, we honor our transcestors and carry their legacy forward,” she said. “This voting center stands as a safe and welcoming space for our trans siblings, while also embracing all allies and residents of Los Angeles County. It’s a space where everyone’s voice matters, uplifting and empowering our community.”
Bamby Salcedo, founder and CEO of the TransLatin@ Coalition. (Photo by Troy Masters)
Bamby Salcedo, founder and CEO of the TransLatin@ Coalition, expressed her support for the initiative, stating, “My sisters at CONOTEC have done a great service to our community by securing this Vote Center. We all look forward to casting our vote in our community and appreciate the support as we work towards equality for all.”
Michael Weinstein, president and CEO of AIDS Healthcare Foundation, the world’s largest and most influential AIDS Service organization, pointed out that around the world voting is a perilous adventure for LGB and particularly trans people. “AIDS Healthcare Foundation is in 47 countries around the world and in so many of those countries, the right to vote does not exist,” he said. “It turns my stomach to see on TV political ads targeting the trans community.” hightlighting the need for safe voting spaces like the CONOTEC.
Kelley Robinson, president of the Human Rights Campaign, praised CONOTEC’s efforts to empower LGBTQ+ voters. “With our vote, each of us has the chance to write the next chapter of this nation’s story. And the nation’s story is incomplete without each one of us. When we show up, equality wins,” Robinson remarked, emphasizing the importance of collective civic participation.
5 films about queer resistance to inspire you for the fight ahead
Transgender activists celebrate legal advances in India, Pakistan
Trump’s vow to invoke national emergency powers and use military force for mass deportations roils LA
Illinois Supreme Court overturns Jussie Smollett’s conviction in hate crime hoax
Estudiantes de la Universidad de El Salvador reclaman respeto para la comunidad LGBTQ+
Biden, other administration officials mark Transgender Day of Remembrance
Trump’s vow to invoke national emergency powers and use military force for mass deportations roils LA
GOP resolution targets Sarah McBride, the first trans member of Congress
Illinois Supreme Court overturns Jussie Smollett’s conviction in hate crime hoax
Quinceañera fashion show raises record-breaking funds
-
National3 days agoBiden, other administration officials mark Transgender Day of Remembrance
-
News2 days agoTrump’s vow to invoke national emergency powers and use military force for mass deportations roils LA
-
Politics5 days agoGOP resolution targets Sarah McBride, the first trans member of Congress
-
Celebrity News2 days agoIllinois Supreme Court overturns Jussie Smollett’s conviction in hate crime hoax
-
LGBTQ Non-Profit Organizations3 days agoQuinceañera fashion show raises record-breaking funds
-
Nigeria4 days agoFour men accused of homosexuality beaten, chased out of Nigerian city
-
Asia2 days agoTransgender activists celebrate legal advances in India, Pakistan
-
Online/Digital Streaming Media5 days agoLGBTQ youth love TikTok. Does TikTok love them back?
-
Kenya5 days agoKenyan advocacy group uses social initiatives to fight homophobia
-
Movies15 hours ago5 films about queer resistance to inspire you for the fight ahead