National
Adoption anti-discrimination bill gets reboot
An adoption anti-discrimination bill previously introduced in the U.S. House is set to get a new start this week when the bill’s sponsor reintroduces it with modified language.
Rep. Pete Stark (D-Calif.), the sponsor of the Every Child Deserves a Family Act, is planning to reintroduce the bill — which would prohibit discrimination against LGBT people seeking to adopt children — after having introduced it for the first time last year.
Additionally, on March 11, Stark plans to lead a congressional briefing panel on Capitol Hill featuring discussion from experts on LGBT adoption. The dialogue is intended to educate lawmakers on the bill’s importance.
Jennifer Chrisler, executive director of the Family Equality Council, said the reintroduced legislation would be similar in scope to the previously introduced bill, except it would make technical changes and allow for new education opportunities for programs helping children find homes.
“This bill added some language around training and education to help people understand what it is that they can and should do when it comes to looking for potential parents,” she said.
The earlier version of the adoption anti-discrimination bill has 14 co-sponsors. Chrisler said the co-sponsors for the earlier legislation would go to the newer version upon its introduction.
To bar discrimination against LGBT people seeking to adopt, the proposed legislation would restrict federal funds for states that have laws or practices barring LGBT people from taking children into their homes.
Currently, three states bar LGBT people from adopting children. Another seven states don’t permit same-sex couples to jointly adopt. Florida, for example, has a statute in place prohibiting gays from adopting, while Arkansas voters in 2008 approved Act 1, which prevents all co-habitating unmarried couples from adopting children.
The laws in 34 other states are unclear about whether same-sex couples may jointly adopt, sometimes resulting in discrimination.
Chrisler said the legislation is intended to provide an incentive for states so they don’t discriminate and instead “focus on what’s in the best interest of the children, which is really finding the right home for that particular child.”
The legislation, Chrisler said, would help thousands of children in foster care throughout the country find new homes.
“This is fundamentally, at its heart, a child welfare bill that seeks to open up more pools of potential parents to provide a loving, stable home environment to children who need those homes,” she said.
Chrisler said about 500,000 children in the U.S. are in the foster care system, and about 120,000 are legally available for adoption.
Children who never find homes have been found to be at greater risk for various problems as they enter adulthood. Chrisler said in 2007, more than 25,000 youth “aged out” of the foster care system, and these children were at higher risk for poverty, homelessness, incarceration and early parenthood.
“A bill like this helps shine a light on the fact that the more available parents that we have to provide loving, permanent homes for children who need them, the better the outcomes for those kids will be,” Chrisler said.
Chrisler said research from the Williams Institute, a think-tank on sexual orientation at the University of California, Los Angeles, shows that more than 2 million LGBT people throughout the country have considered becoming parents, but are barred from existing state laws from doing so.
“If even a quarter of them became foster or adoptive parents, it would meet the needs of all 500,000 children waiting in the foster care system,” she said.
The Every Child Deserves a Family Act is modeled after the Multi-Ethnic Placement Act of 1994 as amended in 1996, which similarly prohibits states from receiving federal funds if they engage in racial or ethnic discrimination when placing children into homes.
Asked whether she thinks Congress will pass the legislation this year, Chrisler expressed uncertainty but noted that advocates will continue to support its passage.
“I’m optimistic that we can leverage this bill to have really good educational conversations,” she said. “I think as anybody who has watched Congress knows, the process of making a bill into a law is a complicated one, but we are going to put all of our energy and all our resources into trying to do just that.”
Chrisler said Stark is optimistic the bill will have a hearing in the House Ways & Means subcommittee to which it’s been assigned.
She also said advocates are working on getting a Senate companion for the bill introduced, although she declined to disclose which senator she was seeking as a sponsor for the legislation.
National
Federal judge blocks Trump’s order restricting gender-affirming care for youth
Seven families with transgender, nonbinary children challenged directive

A federal judge on Thursday issued a temporary restraining order that blocks President Donald Trump’s Jan. 29 executive order restricting access to gender-affirming health care for transgender people under age 19.
The order by Judge Brendan Hurson of the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland, who was appointed by former President Joe Biden, came in response to a request from the plaintiffs in a lawsuit, filed on Feb. 4, against Trump’s directive.
The plaintiffs are seven families with trans or nonbinary children. They are represented by PFLAG National, GMLA, Lambda Legal, the American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU of Maryland, and the law firms Hogan Lovells and Jenner & Block.
Hurson’s temporary restraining order will halt enforcement of Trump’s order for 14 days, but it can be extended. This means health care providers and medical institutions can provide gender-affirming care to minor patients without the risk of losing federal funding.
Families in the lawsuit say their appointments were cancelled shortly after the executive order was issued. Hospitals in Colorado, Virginia, and D.C. stopped providing prescriptions for puberty blockers, hormone therapy, and other interventions for trans patients as they evaluated Trump’s directive.
The harms associated with suddenly withholding access to medical care for these patients were a major focus of Thursday’s hearing on the plaintiffs’ request for the temporary restraining order.
The president’s “order seems to deny that this population even exists, or deserves to exist,” Hurson said, noting the elevated risk of suicide, poverty, addiction, and other hardships among trans people.
National
Trump’s trans erasure arrives at National Park Service
Fate of major 2016 LGBTQ Theme Study unclear

President Trump’s efforts at erasing trans identity intensified this week as employees at the National Park Service were instructed to remove the “T” and “Q” from “LGBTQ” from all internal and external communications.
The change was first noticed on the website of the Stonewall National Monument; trans people of color were integral to the events at Stonewall, which is widely viewed as the kickoff of the modern LGBTQ rights movement. The Stonewall National Monument is the first U.S. national monument dedicated to LGBTQ rights and history.
Reaction to that move was swift. New York City Council member Erik Bottcher wrote, “The Trump administration has erased transgender people from the Stonewall National Monument website. We will not allow them to erase the very existence of our siblings. We are one community!!”
But what most didn’t realize is that the removal of the “T” and “Q” (for transgender and queer) extends to all National Park Service and Interior Department communications, raising concerns that the move could jeopardize future LGBTQ monuments and project work.
The Blade reached out to the National Park Service for comment on the trans erasure and received a curt response that the agency is implementing Trump’s executive order “Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government” as well as agency directives to end all DEI initiatives.
The question being debated internally now, according to a knowledgable source, is what to do with a massive LGBTQ Theme Study, which as of Feb. 14 was still available on the NPS website. In 2014, the Gill Foundation recognized an omission of historic LGBTQ sites in the nation’s records, and the organization made a grant to the National Park Service to commission a first-of-its-kind LGBTQ Theme Study, which was published in 2016. It was a landmark project that represented major progress for the LGBTQ community in having our contributions included in the broader American story, something that is becoming increasingly difficult given efforts like “Don’t Say Gay” laws that ban the teaching of LGBTQ topics in schools.
A source told the Blade that National Park Service communications staff suggested that removing chapters of the 2016 Theme Study that pertain to transgender people might placate anti-trans political appointees. But one employee pushed back on that, suggesting instead that the entire Theme Study be removed. Editing the document to remove one community’s contributions and perspective violates the academic intent of the project, according to the source. A final decision on how to proceed is expected soon.
Meanwhile, a protest is planned for Friday, Feb. 14 at noon at Christopher Park in New York City (7th Ave. S. and Christopher Street). The protest is being planned by staff at the Stonewall Inn.
“The Stonewall Inn and The Stonewall Inn Gives Back Initiative are outraged and appalled by the recent removal of the word ‘transgender’ from the Stonewall National Monument page on the National Park Service website,” the groups said in a statement. “Let us be clear: Stonewall is transgender history. Marsha P. Johnson, Sylvia Rivera, and countless other trans and gender-nonconforming individuals fought bravely, and often at great personal risk, to push back against oppressive systems. Their courage, sacrifice, and leadership were central to the resistance we now celebrate as the foundation of the modern LGBTQ+ rights movement.”
National
Victory Institute executive director speaks about movement response to Trump 2.0
Advocacy groups will lead efforts to push back against anti-LGBTQ administration

President Donald Trump’s issuance of a series of executive orders targeting transgender rights and LGBTQ-inclusive diversity programs on the first day of his second term was a clear signal of the new administration’s appetite for going after queer and gender diverse people.
The Jan. 20 directives also brought into focus the extent to which organizations in the LGBTQ movement, particularly those whose work includes impact litigation, will be responsible for protecting the communities they serve from harmful and discriminatory laws and policies over the next four years.
At a critical time that is likely to test the limits of their capacity, these groups are facing challenges that could restrict their access to critical resources thanks in part to the conservative movement’s opposition to diversity, equity, and inclusion in both government and the private sector.
LGBTQ organizations expected federal funding for their work would dry up when the incoming administration took over, given that Trump and his allies made no secret of their plans to aggressively reshape the government including by ridding U.S. agencies of all DEI-related programs, policies, and activities.
Trump went even further, however, issuing orders to categorically freeze the disbursement of government funds tied to preexisting grants and contracts, while threatening investigations of private companies for “illegal” policies and practices related to DEI.
Partly in response to pressure from conservative leaders and activists, over the past couple of years companies have increasingly backed away from DEI efforts including, especially, support for LGBTQ communities and causes.
Coupled with the loss of federal funding, a decline in corporate giving to LGBTQ organizations could have devastating impacts on the communities they serve, potentially leading to cutbacks in programs and services core to their missions or imperiling their efforts to push back against a hostile regime.
“Continuing to fund our work is obviously top of mind for everyone right now,” Elliot Imse, executive director of the LGBTQ+ Victory Institute, told the Washington Blade during an interview last week.
The move by many private companies away from supporting LGBTQ equality has been surprising, Imse said, but “what we know is it’s a very uncertain environment for corporations right now, and they are feeling out these new realities.”
On the other hand, the moment also presents an opportunity to remind businesses that commitments to DEI are good for their bottom line while rewarding companies that resist pressure to abandon their LGBTQ customers, employees, and communities, Imse said.
“There’s a lot of courageous corporations out there, too, right now, a lot that are continuing to step up. And we need to be grateful; we need to be making purchasing decisions as a community with those corporations in mind. Every corporation that has reaffirmed its commitment to us, we need to go out and support them.”
“While Victory Institute — like all LGBTQ+ organizations — is concerned about the current fundraising environment, we have a programmatic plan in place that directly addresses the realities of what is happening across the country right now,” he said, with programs to support LGBTQ elected officials serving everywhere from small municipal offices to the most powerful positions in government.
A diverse pipeline of out leaders from diverse backgrounds is the best bulwark “against attacks on our equality and democratic backsliding,” Imse said. “We have a very robust programmatic plan for 2025 — and we need to execute on it at this critical moment.”
While the Victory Institute is currently looking for funding to support the organization’s international work to compensate for the loss of federal grants, Imse said the group plans to expand U.S.-based programs, maximizing their reach at a time when this work is especially critical.
“We’re going to be in more cities than ever before. We’re going to have a larger training presence than ever before, including our LGBTQ+ Public Leadership Summits, which are specifically designed to inspire and recruit LGBTQ+ people to run for office. It is essential folks reject the demoralization of the current moment and that we have more boots on the ground to support those willing to step up and run.”
He added, “we are hopeful that we will be able to raise the money we need to carry these programs out, and we believe we can make the case to donors that these programs are an essential path forward.”
At the same time, Imse acknowledged that LGBTQ groups, including the Victory Institute, are in a difficult position at the moment and “we’ll absolutely have to adjust if we see a downturn in fundraising throughout the year.”
“it’s going to be an uphill battle, there’s no doubt about that. Like all other organizations, we’re going to watch the numbers and adjust as necessary,” he said, adding, “the people we have at our organization are what makes our organization strong — their expertise, their relationships, the networks that they’ve built.”
And while he said “making sure that we meet the moment is something that keeps me up at night,” Imse stressed that “figuring out how to balance the reality we are in versus optimism is something that is on everyone’s mind as you talk to LGBTQ+ community members, your staff, your funders” who recognize that “you must have hope, because if people back away from our equality at this moment, it’ll be much worse than even the situation we’re in right now.”
There is no shortage of good reasons to hold onto hope, Imse said. “Our movement has always thrived in moments of crisis. While we’d prefer no crisis, it refocuses us. It motivates us. And oftentimes leads to breakthroughs that we may not have had otherwise. It destroys complacency. It instills urgency.”
After Trump took office and the new Congress was sated with GOP majorities in both chambers, LGBTQ groups whose work includes lobbying or government relations understood their ability to influence policy at the federal level would be limited, at least until Democratic allies have the opportunity to retake control of the House in 2026.
The Victory Institute was especially well positioned to shift away from Washington, Imse said, because state legislatures, city councils, and school boards have always been the organization’s “bread and butter” and the elections for these positions “truly matter” even if they are less “high profile” than U.S. congressional races.
“When we’re talking about opportunities to make progress in the near future, opportunities to launch a successful offense and defense, it is in these legislative bodies,” he said. “And they arguably make more impact on individuals’ lives than the federal government does.”
Imse added this is especially true with regard to opportunities for legislative action to support LGBTQ Americans and defend their rights, which is unlikely to happen on Capitol Hill for a “long time.”
It is especially important now that LGBTQ communities and organizations support each other, he said.
LGBTQ movement groups, particularly those with international focus, “have been phenomenal in bringing us together and trying to find out what’s been done, keeping us up to date on potential litigation opportunities, as well as looking for funders that are willing to step up at this absolutely critical moment in our movement’s history,” Imse said.
“We also need our community to step up in terms of supporting these organizations,” he said, “financially through resources and capacity and giving their time, because that’s the only way we’re going to be able to move forward effectively.”
It is “important that our community members remain active, engaged, and involved, and that our LGBTQ+ media continues to ensure our stories are being told,” Imse said, adding, “Especially right now, this is an entire movement ecosystem that is working to make sure whatever backsliding is about to occur is not permanent.”
-
District of Columbia5 days ago
Booz Allen withdraws as WorldPride corporate sponsor
-
District of Columbia3 days ago
Protests against Trump executive orders to take place in D.C. on Thursday
-
a&e features2 days ago
D.C.’s most eligible queer singles
-
District of Columbia1 day ago
Dancing protesters denounce Trump’s Kennedy Center takeover