National
Calif. man could become first openly gay dad in Congress
The mayor of Palm Springs is making a bid to become the first openly gay member of Congress who’s married with children.
Steve Pougnet, 46, a Democrat, is seeking to oust Republican incumbent Mary Bono Mack next year to represent California’s 45th district in the U.S. House. A win for Pougnet would make him the fourth sitting openly gay member of Congress.
Pougnet, who’s currently mayor of Palm Springs and a former city council member for the city, said in an interview with DC Agenda that he’s running for a House seat because he’s always had a “huge passion” for public service.
“I’ve always had the ability to lead, to bring people together,” he said. “And I think that’s why I moved pretty quickly in my young political career, because I’ve always had the ability to bring people together and to lead.”
Pougnet said he’ll need about $2.5 million to win and “a lot of hard, hard work” that relies heavily on grassroots outreach. He has secured an endorsement from the Gay & Lesbian Victory Fund and applied for support from the Human Rights Campaign.
He currently has no Democratic challenger for his primary in June, and would face Bono Mack in November 2010.
No stranger to helping the state’s LGBT community, Pougnet was involved last year in the fight against Proposition 8, which ended marriage rights for same-sex couples in the Golden State. He helped Equality California raise hundreds of thousands of dollars to preserve same-sex marriage and married 118 same-sex couples — more than any mayor in California.
“So, I have stood up for the issue of marriage equality,” he said. “I’m the mayor who married more couples than any other mayor in the state of California. One hundred eighteen — on our own time — we don’t get paid to do that because it was the right thing to do.”
Geoff Kors, executive director of Equality California, said Pougnet was “a great leader” in the fight to protect same-sex marriage.
“Steve chaired our Equality California’s Equality Awards in Palm Springs last year, and helped raised several hundred thousand dollars with us in the fight against Prop 8 at that dinner,” Kors said. “And he’s been involved in the cause for as long as I’ve known him.”
Kors said Equality California hasn’t traditionally endorsed candidates in federal elections, but that policy may change next year, and it would be difficult for his organization’s political action committee to support someone other than Pougnet.
“I think his victory would demonstrate that an openly gay candidate can win in a district that still is on the conservative side,” Kors said.
Pougnet was among the couples married last year in California. He wed his partner of 18 years, Christopher Green, who’s worked for more than 20 years in sales and marketing at Amgen, a biotech company. They have 3-year-old twins, Julia and Beckham.
During the course of his political career — as well as his current bid for Congress — Pougnet said his sexual orientation hasn’t been a major issue.
“Every once in a while you get a piece of hate mail, especially over Proposition 8, because I was very public,” he said. “Honestly, I think when you serve the people and all the people, and you’re working on the issues that are important to many different segments of the community, people respond to that.”
One of Pougnet’s priorities if he’s elected to Congress is improving the economic conditions for his constituents. He noted that his district has an unemployment rate of more than 15 percent and home foreclosures per capita are among the highest in the country.
But Pougnet also said he’s committed to advancing LGBT issues, should he be elected to Congress. He pledged to vote in favor of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act and a bill that would allow gay Americans to sponsor their foreign partners for residency, as well as backing repeals of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” and the Defense of Marriage Act.
“Those issues are no-brainers for me,” he said. “For me, the issues are something I wholeheartedly believe in and don’t have a problem supporting.”
Asked whether Congress and President Obama have moved quickly enough on LGBT issues, Pougnet said the administration has been dealing with a host of problems left over from the Bush years, but that lawmakers could have acted more quickly on overturning “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”
“I do think that one issue that could have been done quickly is ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,’ because when you have an issue like that where when you start looking at the polls, the majority are firmly in favor of repeal,” he said.
Pougnet said he wants Obama to issue a stop-loss order to prevent the discharge of more LGBT service members until Congress can accomplish repeal.
“There certainly might be some initial, ‘My God, what’s he done to the military?’ type of thing, which is ridiculous, but that moves away very quickly,” he said. “And I think this issue we’re talking about is protecting American soldiers, men and women. That repeal would end up saving lives.”
Gay conservatives back Bono Mack
Even though he enjoys support from many LGBT groups, Pougnet is running against an incumbent lawmaker that some describe as a pro-gay Republican.
Jimmy LaSalvia, executive director of gay conservative group GOProud said his organization is among those supporting Bono Mack.
“She’s been a strong advocate for gay and lesbian Americans in Congress and she’s exactly who we need in that seat,” he said.
Bono Mack has often taken pro-LGBT stances throughout her tenure in the House. She voted against the Federal Marriage Amendment in 2004 and 2006, voted twice in favor of hates crimes protections legislation, and in 2007 voted in support of ENDA.
Ryan Watkins, campaign manager for Bono Mack, said her record shows her commitment to fairness.
“Congresswoman Bono Mack’s entire career has demonstrated her belief that individuals should be judged on their own merit,” he said.
“Tolerance and diversity are fundamental values that she embraces.”
LaSalvia criticized Pougnet for not taking a position on the estate tax, which LaSalvia said is discriminatory because it means inheritance from an LGBT person to their same-sex partner could be taxed, unlike the inheritance between straight married couples.
“He needs to realize that this is a congressional campaign and not a beauty pageant,” LaSalvia said. “If he doesn’t want to take positions on issues, he should run for Date Festival princess instead of Congress.”
Jordan Marks, campaign manager for Pougnet, said in an e-mail that Pougnet is focused on plans to create jobs in his district and is not responding to such criticism from Washington groups.
“The reality is residents of the district are facing a very difficult economy and that is what this campaign will be about. Bono Mack should disavow cynical attacks like this. This all just shows we need new leadership in Washington,” Marks said.
Even with her votes in favor of the LGBT priorities, Pougnet criticized Bono Mack for not taking a stand last year on Prop 8 as well as not stating her position on “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”
“For her, she kind of wavers, waffles,” Pougnet said. “She didn’t want to upset one half and not the other half. My issue with that is come clean.”
Watkins said Bono Mack hasn’t taken a position on “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” because she feels “military personnel decisions should be made by the leaders of our Armed Forces, not Congress.”
“If military commanders believe a change is warranted, she will revisit the issue,” he said.
As for Prop 8, Watkins said Bono Mack didn’t declare her position because it was a state issue and more properly left to the voters to decide.
But Pougnet said Bono Mack has taken a position on a state issue that will have significant impact on the people of California by endorsing Republican candidate Meg Whitman — an opponent of same-sex marriage — in next year’s gubernatorial election.
“She’s now very involved in the biggest state issue that we have, which is the next governor of the state of California, because Sacramento is such a mess,” Pougnet said. “She’s endorsed Meg Whitman, who is not a marriage equality person. Not at all.”
In uphill battle, Pougnet trails in campaign funds
Pougnet faces a significant challenge in his bid for Congress. A Republican has held the seat for California’s 45th congressional district since at least 1982, and Bono Mack won the seat last year by taking more than 60 percent of the vote.
Still, Pougnet has filled his coffers with significant funds. According to the most recent information on the Federal Elections Committee web site, he’s thus far secured $443,330 for his campaign. It’s short of Bono Mack, who’s raised $664,775, but his supporters say it’s enough for him to mount a serious challenge.
Andy Stone, spokesperson for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, said Pougnet has a good shot at winning because the demographics in the district are changing and the area has had particular growth in non-white residents.
“If you look specifically at the voter registration numbers, the margin of difference between registered Republicans and registered Democrats has declined by more than half from just a couple years ago to today,” he said.
Stone also said Pougnet is a strong candidate because of his background as a public official.
Idaho
Idaho advances bill to restrict bathroom access for transgender residents
HB 752 passed in state House of Representatives on Monday
The Idaho House of Representatives passed House Bill 752 on Monday, a measure that would make it a crime for a person to use a bathroom other than the one designated for their “biological sex.”
The story was first reported by the Idaho Capitol Sun after the bill cleared the House.
House Bill 752 would make it a criminal offense — either a misdemeanor or a felony, depending on the number of prior offenses — for individuals who “knowingly and willfully” enter a bathroom or changing room designated for the opposite sex.
The bill would apply to public buildings, including government-owned spaces, and places of “public accommodation,” a category that includes private businesses.
According to the bill’s text, it would “prohibit a person from entering a restroom or changing room designated for the opposite sex; provide a penalty; provide exceptions; define terms; and declare an emergency and provide an effective date.”
A first offense would be a misdemeanor, punishable by up to one year in prison. A second or subsequent offense within five years would be a felony, punishable by up to five years in prison.
The bill passed in a 54–15 vote on Monday. Six Republicans broke with their party’s majority to join nine Democrats in opposing the measure.
The bill’s sponsor, state Rep. Cornel Rasor, a Republican from Sagle near the Washington-Idaho border, told House lawmakers that the legislation is intended to protect women and girls.
“It prevents discomfort and voyeurism escalation and assaults, while preserving single-user options and narrow exceptions so no one is denied access for emergency aid,” Rasor said.
State Rep. Chris Mathias, a Democrat from Boise, disagreed, arguing that the legislation would unfairly target transgender Idahoans.
“The truth of the matter is — and I know a lot of people don’t want to say it — but forcing people who don’t look like the sex they were assigned at birth, or transgender folks, to use other people’s bathrooms is going to put a lot of people in danger,” Mathias said.
The Idaho American Civil Liberties Union made a statement about the bill following its passage.
“Idaho lawmakers continue pushing these harmful, invasive bathroom laws, yet cannot present credible evidence that transgender people using gender-aligned bathrooms threaten public safety,” the Idaho ACLU said. “The bill does nothing to address real criminal acts, such as sexual assault or voyeurism, and disregards concerns from law enforcement about the burden enforcement would place on local resources.”
In addition to human rights advocates, who have spoken out against similar bills advancing in state legislatures across the country, Idaho law enforcement groups have also opposed the measure. They argue that the way the legislation is written would “pose significant practical enforcement challenges,” noting that officers are tasked with maintaining public safety — not conducting gender checks or policing bathroom access.
During a committee hearing last week, law enforcement representatives and several trans Idahoans testified that the bill would make many residents less safe.
“Officers responding to a complaint would be placed in the difficult position of determining an individual’s biological sex in order to enforce the statute,” Idaho Fraternal Order of Police President Bryan Lovell wrote. “In many circumstances, there is no clear or reasonable way for officers to make that determination without engaging in questioning or investigative actions that could be viewed as invasive and inappropriate.”
The Idaho Sheriffs’ Association requested that lawmakers amend the bill to require that individuals be given an opportunity to leave a bathroom immediately before facing potential prosecution.
The bill now heads to the Idaho Senate for consideration. To become law, it must pass both chambers and avoid a veto from the governor.
A separate bathroom bill, House Bill 607, which would be enforced through civil lawsuits, passed the House last month but has not yet received a committee hearing in the Senate.
State Department
Report: US to withhold HIV aid to Zambia unless mineral access expanded
New York Times obtained Secretary of State Marco Rubio memo
The State Department is reportedly considering withholding assistance for Zambians with HIV unless the country’s government allows the U.S. to access more of its minerals.
The New York Times on Monday reported Secretary of State Marco Rubio in a memo to State Department’s Bureau of African Affairs staffers wrote the U.S. “will only secure our priorities by demonstrating willingness to publicly take support away from Zambia on a massive scale.” The newspaper said it obtained a copy of the letter.
Zambia is a country in southern Africa that borders Tanzania, Malawi, Mozambique, Zimbabwe, Botswana, Namibia, Angola, and the Democratic Republic of Congo.
The Times notes upwards of 1.3 million Zambians receive daily HIV medications through PEPFAR. The newspaper reported Rubio in his memo said the Trump-Vance administration could “significantly cut assistance” as soon as May.
“Reports of (the) State Department withholding lifesaving HIV treatment in return for mining concessions in Zambia does not make us safer, stronger, or more prosperous,” said U.S. Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), the ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, on Tuesday. “Monetizing innocent people’s lives further undermines U.S. global leadership and is just plain wrong.”
The Washington Blade has reached out to the State Department for comment.
Zambia received breakthrough HIV prevention drug through PEPFAR
Rubio on Jan. 28, 2025, issued a waiver that allowed PEPFAR and other “life-saving humanitarian assistance” programs to continue to operate during a freeze on nearly all U.S. foreign aid spending. HIV/AIDS service providers around the world with whom the Blade has spoken say PEPFAR cuts and the loss of funding from the U.S. Agency for International Development, which officially closed on July 1, 2025, has severely impacted their work.
The State Department last September announced PEPFAR will distribute lenacapavir in countries with high prevalence rates. Zambia two months later received the first doses of the breakthrough HIV prevention drug.
Kenya and Uganda are among the African countries have signed health agreements with the U.S. since the Trump-Vance administration took office.
The Times notes the countries that signed these agreements pledged to increase health spending. The Blade last month reported LGBTQ rights groups have questioned whether these agreements will lead to further exclusion and government-sanctioned discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity.
National
‘They took him!’ Gay married couple torn apart by ICE
As Allan Marrero remains in ICE custody, his husband Matt continues to fight tirelessly for his release.
For 113 days, Allan Marrero has been in U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) custody, while his husband, Matthew Marrero, has been using every available avenue to secure his release.
Since Nov. 24, 2025, Allan—originally from the Cayman Islands—has been held at multiple detention facilities across the United States. His detention began after what was meant to be a routine, good-faith marriage-based green card interview at Federal Plaza in New York City, marking two years of marriage with Matthew.
Advocates, including Rev. Amanda Hambrick Ashcraft, Rev. Dr. Jacqui Lewis, and attorney Alexandra Rizio, have been actively involved in supporting the couple and navigating the legal challenges posed by ICE and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). The case highlights the Trump-Vance administration’s aggressive use of immigration enforcement to detain and deport individuals, even in circumstances where applicants have established legal claims to remain in the U.S.
Timeline of Allan’s detainment
On Nov. 24, Allan and his husband Matt arrived at 26 Federal Plaza in New York City for what was supposed to be a routine, marriage-based green card interview. They were accompanied by Rev. Amanda Hambrick Ashcraft, a minister from Middle Church in Manhattan, where the couple attended and Matthew sang in the choir.
They arrived early for their 8 a.m. appointment, prepared and hopeful. Despite growing news coverage about increased immigration enforcement under President Donald Trump, they believed in the process and felt confident they had done everything right.
“They brought with them a three-inch binder documenting their entire life together—photos, letters, legal records, and other evidence,” Ashcraft said.
“From the moment you get to Federal Plaza, the process is extremely traumatic—and that’s by design,” she explained. “There’s nothing warm or intuitive about it. It’s dehumanizing, and parts of it feel barbaric.”
Immediately after meeting the USCIS officer, something felt off.
“We came with a three-inch binder of our entire life—photos, letters, everything,” Matt said. “We were dressed up, ready, confident we had done everything right. The first thing she said was, ‘I don’t want that. Take it all apart.’ That was the moment I knew something wasn’t right.”
The officer then asked the couple for their passports—something neither of them had on hand. That seemed to be strike two, signaling that, just as with previous steps in this process, the interview was already off course because of the woman behind the desk.
As the couple was told to move to a new room for their interview, Ashcraft was denied entry with them. This struck all three as odd; Ashcraft had attended immigration and green card interviews before to provide spiritual guidance and bolster claims of legitimacy, with no issues. Coupled with the initial hostility over the binder, it was a clear sign that the day would not go as hoped.
“There’s no real policy—it’s whoever is in front of you deciding what the rules are at that moment,” Ashcraft added. “Whatever they say goes. That’s what makes it so dangerous.”
Inside the tightly controlled interview, tensions escalated.
“I looked over at my husband when she asked how we met—just instinct. He’s the love of my life,” Matt said. “She snapped her fingers in my face and said, ‘Don’t look at him.’ We’re telling our love story, and I’m not even allowed to look at my husband.”
The officer then raised questions about a missed immigration hearing for Allan in 2022.
Allan had lived in the United States since 2013 and had been diligent about maintaining his legal status and personal growth. During that time, he had entered a rehabilitation program for alcohol addiction—a commitment that, coincidentally, caused him to miss the scheduled court hearing. Medical records explained by Alexandra Rizio, Allan’s attorney, corroborate this.
Because the judge did not know Allan was in rehab, a removal order was issued in his absence.
“He didn’t realize that he had a removal order in his name,” Rizio, the Make the Road New York attorney, explained. “When you have a removal order, it means ICE can pick you up at any moment. He walked into that interview completely unaware that he was at risk of being arrested on the spot.”

The officer acknowledged that their marriage was legitimate but denied Allan’s green card application. She told them they would need to appear before an immigration judge, signaling that his journey to legal status was far from over and still subject to the whims of others.
“She told us, ‘Out of the goodness of my heart, I’ll let you leave today. I could have called ICE, but I won’t,’” Matt recalled. “My husband started crying, I was a wreck.”
Despite that comment, the couple was escorted through a series of back hallways. Allan’s file was handed off to ICE officers, and the supervisor walked away.
“They walked us down this long hallway, took his file, handed it to ICE agents, and just left. No explanation, no warning. Suddenly they’re telling him to put his hands behind his back, and I’m standing there asking, ‘What is happening?’”
The gravity of the situation escalated.
“He was crying, I was crying, we were hugging, and I kept saying, ‘It’s going to be okay,’” Matt said. “And then they just pulled him away into an elevator and left me there. It happened so fast it didn’t even feel real.”
A supervisor entered briefly to distinguish between what could be controlled inside the office and what could not be controlled outside. Rizio called this a deliberate choice to intensify the emotional pressure.
“What the officer could have done was say, ‘You have a removal order—go hire a lawyer,’” Rizio said. “That would have been the humane and reasonable response. Instead, ICE was called, and they arrested him.”
Outside the room, Ashcraft heard the chaos unfold.
“The next thing I heard was Matthew screaming down the hallway: ‘Amanda! Amanda! They took him!’” she recounted. “That’s how it happened—just like that, after everything they had prepared.”
For the next 36 hours, Matt had no information about his husband’s whereabouts.
“For 36 hours, I had no idea where my husband was,” he said. “No phone call, no information, nothing. It felt like he had just disappeared.”
The following morning, Matt’s mother and sister drove down from Connecticut to help. They returned to Federal Plaza with Allan’s anxiety medication and contact information, only to be told minutes later that Allan was no longer there. The couple could not locate him through the ICE online system. Only after contacting an attorney did they learn he had been transferred to Delaney Hall, a detention facility in New Jersey.
Matt and Allan’s mother drove to Delaney Hall in Newark, an industrial area where families—including children—waited in the rain. Inside, staff initially insisted Allan was not present, despite documentation proving otherwise. After long delays, they were finally allowed to see him.
This was the first time Matt felt the point-blank homophobia of the detention system.
“When I finally saw him, they told us we couldn’t touch,” Matt said. “I’m watching straight couples kiss and hold each other, but I can’t even hold my husband’s hand.”
“You ripped my husband away, didn’t tell me where he was for 36 hours, and now I’m not allowed to console him?” he added. “It was so cold—it felt completely inhuman.”
Conditions inside detention quickly became grueling.
“He was moved in the middle of the night, chained at his wrists and ankles, not told where he was going,” Matt said. “They kept the cuffs on for days—he had cuts and bruises.”
“The worst part isn’t even the facilities—it’s the transport,” Matt continued. “You’re chained like an animal, trying to eat a bologna sandwich and drink water while shackled. You can barely move your body.”
Allan remained at Delaney Hall for approximately two weeks. One night, he told Matt that groups of detainees were being taken out in the middle of the night without warning. Shortly afterward, he was among them.
Around 12:30 a.m., Allan called to say he was being moved. He and others were gathered in a visitation room and held for hours without food or beds. By midday, they were shackled again, loaded onto transport, and flown out of state. His location once again disappeared from the ICE tracking system.
Over the next several days, Allan was moved through multiple locations, including a holding area near an airport in Phoenix, where detainees were kept in overcrowded, tent-like enclosures without seating. He remained in restraints for extended periods and was denied access to his medication.
From there, he was transferred through facilities in Texas and Louisiana before ultimately being sent to a remote detention site in the Florida Everglades, informally known as “Alligator Alcatraz.”
Conditions there were severe. Detainees were held in cages with dozens of men in each enclosure. Sanitation was poor, with overflowing toilets near sleeping areas. Exposure to the elements and limited access to medical care caused Allan’s health to deteriorate. Phone calls were limited to short, scheduled windows.
“He told me about being in a cage in the Everglades—30 men, toilets overflowing next to where they sleep,” Matt said. “There were signs about poisonous snakes, and he said, ‘If one shows up, I’m going to die—there’s nobody here.’”
“ICE officers would tell them, ‘You’re a burden to your family. Just sign your self-deportation papers,’” Matt added. “He would call me crying, saying, ‘Just let me go, forget about me.’ That’s psychological warfare.”
Ashcraft reflected on the system’s cruelty.
“At every step, it feels designed to be as insular, as cruel, and as impenetrable as possible,” she said. “At every turn, we’re seeing a new kind of cruelty…Someone will say, ‘They can’t do that,’ and we have to say, ‘Actually, they are.’”
Eventually, Allan was transferred to a detention facility in Natchez, Miss., where conditions were more stable and he was finally able to receive his prescribed medications. Around this time, his legal case began to shift.
His attorney submitted documentation showing that the missed 2022 hearing had occurred while he was in a verified rehabilitation program. The same immigration judge who had issued the original removal order agreed to reopen the case and rescinded that order, restoring Allan’s standing.
“The judge agreed with us and granted bond. At that point, we thought he would be released and we could move forward. That’s how the system is supposed to work,” Rizio said.
In early February, a bond hearing was scheduled. Matt traveled to Mississippi in anticipation of Allan’s release. The legal team presented extensive documentation, including letters of support from members of Congress, as well as evidence of Allan’s marriage and community ties.
Instead of releasing him, ICE exercised its authority to place a 10-day hold while considering an appeal. During that time, Matt remained in Mississippi, visiting Allan regularly.
“ICE decided to just ignore that and not release him. They used something called the ‘auto stay’ provision to keep him locked up anyway,” Rizio said. “It’s essentially them saying, ‘We don’t like the judge’s order, so we’re not going to follow it….That feels crazy—because it is crazy. There’s no real statutory basis for it. It’s a regulation that allows them to operate outside the bounds of what the law actually says.”
Before the hold period ended, a second immigration judge became involved. Without reviewing the full evidence or receiving a newly filed green card application, the judge issued a decision in advance.
“A completely different judge—who isn’t even an immigration specialist—stepped in and denied an application that wasn’t even before him,” Rizio explained. “I have never seen anything like that in 14 years of practice.”
She has argued that the decision was procedurally improper and legally flawed.
“He decided, based on rehab records showing recovery and sobriety, to label Allan a ‘habitual drunkard.’ He cherry-picked information and ignored the evidence that he had successfully completed treatment.”
When the 10-day hold expired, Allan’s legal team attempted to secure his release again, but ICE cited the new ruling to continue detaining him. By that point, Allan had been in detention for more than 100 days.
“He could have walked out of detention with a green card,” Rizio said. “Instead, he’s still sitting in detention because of actions that simply shouldn’t have happened.”
“None of what I just described reflects a system that cares about justice,” she said. “It feels like punishment. I feel very confident these actions are designed to make people give up… Allan has already lost over three months of his life. He’s never going to get that time back.”
“We did everything right,” Matt said. “We followed the law, built a life, got married, had a clear pathway to citizenship. And now my whole life is on pause. If someone wants to understand this, imagine someone coming in and kidnapping the person you love most—taking away all your control. That’s what this feels like.”
Allan remains in detention in Natchez while legal challenges move forward. Throughout his time in custody, detainees have reported being pressured to accept voluntary deportation, often being told they are burdens to their families. Despite the mounting legal and emotional toll, Allan continues to fight his case from inside detention, while his family and community advocate for his release on the outside.
The couple has set up a Go-Fund-Me to help with the financial costs of this ongoing situation.
The Blade contacted ICE and DHS for comment but did not receive a response.

