National
LGBT contingent to join weekend immigration rally
Proponents of comprehensive immigration reform legislation are planning to rally this weekend
Proponents of comprehensive immigration reform legislation are planning to rally this weekend in support of the bill — and drum up support for a proposed component that would help same-sex couples.
Tens of thousands of demonstrators — perhaps even up to 100,000 — are expected to gather Sunday at 2 p.m. on the National Mall to call for passing immigration reform this year. Reform Immigration for America, a coalition of immigration reform organizations, is staging the event.
Within this larger protest, a contingent of about 200 protesters is set to advocate for LGBT inclusion in immigration reform, and in particular, a provision to help same-sex bi-national couples.
Because same-sex couples don’t have federal marriage rights that are available to straight couples, LGBT people in same-sex relationships with a foreign national cannot marry their partner to allow them to stay in the U.S.
Under current immigration law, an estimated 36,000 same-sex bi-national couples are kept apart or are in danger of separation. Standalone legislation in Congress known as the Uniting American Families Act would allow LGBT people to sponsor their partners for permanent residency.
Advocates of UAFA are trying to include the legislation as a provision in comprehensive reform — and are taking part in the rally to ensure their presence is visible within the larger immigration movement.
Steve Ralls, spokesperson for Immigration Equality, a group advocating for UAFA, said the rally will be “a visible reminder” to Congress and the Obama administration on keeping their pledge to tackle immigration reform in 2010.
“In fact, I would say that it has already been effective,” Ralls said. “The president last week called key senators to the White House and began holding meetings about how to address this issue, and I have no doubt that the march on the Mall helped to spur those meetings along.”
Among those participating in the rally is Laurie Larson, a 56-year-old Arlington, Va., resident, who’s marching on behalf of two friends who were torn apart.
Joe and Steve, former D.C. residents, lived in the District for 10 years together until Joe was laid off from his position as a structural engineer in 2009. Joe and Steve asked to be identified only by their first names. Because of the nature of his visa, Joe was able to stay in the United States for only six months after he lost his job. The couple is now separated, but planning a move to Canada so they can stay together.
Larson, who’s straight, said she’s taking part in the rally — after having participated in a LGBT rally for immigration reform in October — because she thinks the situation is “totally ludicrous.”
“It’s incumbent upon us to keep the issue in front of people,” she said. “We’ll continue to keep the issue in front of Congress and our representatives and the public at large. To me, it’s really one of the last civil rights issues of the 21st century.”
Also participating in the rally is Emmanuel Garcia, the Chicago-based host of “Homofrecuencia,” the only Spanish language LGBT radio show in the United States. He’s bringing about 100 LGBT people on a bus to participate in the D.C. protest.
For Garcia, who’s gay, participating in the march is not just about drawing attention to UAFA, but showing that LGBT immigrants are among those who are part of the immigration movement.
“We’re focused on a more complex conversation on immigration reform,” he said. “We also understand that there are a lot of LGBTs who would benefit from immigration reform under this bill without the Uniting American Families Act included.”
Garcia said passage of immigration reform would allow LGBT immigrants — even without the passage of UAFA — to remain in the U.S. if they don’t have a partner to sponsor them for residency.
“We have people who have come out as gay, lesbian and bisexual who are also coming out as undocumented,” he said. “Some of those stories relate to both experiences — what it’s like to come out as LGBT, what it’s like to come out in a society that doesn’t accept that doesn’t want to give a certain group rights because they don’t feel they deserve them.”
As advocates come to rally on the National Mall, Sens. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) are developing comprehensive immigration reform legislation in the U.S. Senate. Earlier this month, both senators met with Obama at the White House to discuss moving forward with the legislation.
But whether these senators will include UAFA in their legislation is unknown. Neither Schumer nor Graham’s office responded to DC Agenda’s requests to comment on the inclusion of UAFA in their bill.
Still, Ralls said he’s “optimistic” that the comprehensive legislation will include a provision for bi-national same-sex couples.
Ralls said Schumer noted during congressional testimony last year that he thought it was appropriate for immigration reform to include a UAFA-like provision. Ralls also noted that Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee, is the sponsor for the standalone version of UAFA in the Senate.
“Our hope and expectation is that with two champions as strong and influential as that, that we have a very good shot of being included,” Ralls said.
It’s also unclear when Schumer and Graham will make their bill public — and when they do, if enough time remains in the legislative calendar to pass immigration reform this year. With limited time remaining before lawmakers break to campaign for mid-term elections, other major issues such as financial reform and climate change legislation could take precedence over immigration.
Ralls said he hopes the senators will introduce their legislation sometime this spring and noted that Schumer has “remained steadfast in his desire to introduce the legislation just as soon as we can.”
Asked whether enough time remains this year for Congress to take on immigration reform, Ralls replied, “The short answer is I hope so.”
“I know that Sen. Schumer is working very hard to build the coalitions in the Senate and to bring people together to make that happen,” he said.
Despite advocates’ push for including a provision for UAFA as part of comprehensive immigration reform, a number of uncertainties and obstacles are in the way. One issue is whether Graham, who has a conservative voting record, would be open to including UAFA. The Human Rights Campaign gave him a score of 0 out of 100 on its most recent congressional scorecard.
But Ralls said he hopes Republicans such as Graham would allow for the inclusion of UAFA in the comprehensive reform because such a provision would strengthen families in the U.S.
“Republican lawmakers are going to take a strong stand in favor of family unification as a priority in the comprehensive bill,” Ralls said. “Lesbian and gay families are a natural fit for family unification issues.”
Ralls added that if Schumer and Graham can work together to create a bill that boasts bipartisan support for other issues — such as creating a path to citizenship for immigrants — UAFA “will not be a make-or-break situation.”
Another uncertainly is the degree to which the White House would support passing UAFA as part of comprehensive reform, particularly if administration officials believe including the provision would complicate passage of the larger bill.
The White House has expressed support for both UAFA and comprehensive immigration reform as individual items, but hasn’t endorsed passing them together as one larger package.
In response to a query on whether Obama would support passing UAFA this year as part of immigration reform, Shin Inouye, a White House spokesperson, said in a statement the president’s “commitment to fixing our broken immigration system remains unwavering, and he continues to hope for bipartisan leadership on legislation.”
“He has told members of both parties that if they can fashion a plan, he is eager to work with them to get it done and he has assigned Secretary [of Homeland Security Janet] Napolitano to work with stakeholders on that effort,” Inouye said.
Ralls said he thinks it would be “logical” for the White House to endorse UAFA as part of comprehensive reform if the administration favors passage of both legislative items.
“My belief is that they would like to see UAFA passed and that they are committed to comprehensive reform — and it just seems logical to me that the two go well together,” Ralls said. “If we’re going to have a comprehensive bill, it should be truly comprehensive and include lesbian and gay immigrants, too.”
But opposition from the Catholic Church — a strong voice for the Hispanic community seeking immigration reform — could be an obstacle. Last year, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops came out against UAFA and said they couldn’t support immigration reform if a provision for LGBT couples were included in the larger legislation.
Ralls said the Conference of Catholic Bishops is “a sole minority voice,” though, among religious groups that have stated positions on the legislation. He said Methodists, Episcopalians, Unitarians and Jewish groups are among the religious organizations supporting UAFA.
“The list of faith groups who are committed to immigration reform that includes lesbian and gay families is very long and diverse,” Ralls said. “At the end of the day, people of faith should support keeping children with parents and families together and, in my view, it is the Christian thing to do.”
Also lacking among the advocacy groups is unanimity in favor of including UAFA as part of the larger bill.
Reform Immigration for America, an umbrella group for organizations calling for comprehensive reform, hasn’t stated a position on including UAFA in a larger bill. The organization didn’t respond to DC Agenda’s request to comment on its position.
Still, other groups supporting immigration reform have come out in favor of including UAFA in comprehensive reform. The Fair Immigration Movement, a project with the Center for Community Change, endorsed inclusion of UAFA earlier this month.
Marissa Graciosa, director of FIRM, said in a statement that her project supports the inclusion of UAFA to keep couples together.
“There is power in our diversity, but we must honor that diversity,” she said. “And it starts with keeping all families from all backgrounds together. This is why we support the Uniting American Families Act.”
Ralls said Immigration Equality is an active member for Reform Immigration for America and is working to bring organizations within that umbrella group in favor of UAFA inclusion.
In addition to FIRM, Ralls said the Mexican American Legal Defense & Educational Fund has noted the importance of including same-sex couples in immigration reform.
“So there are organizations within the immigration movement — both faith groups and immigrant groups that have been very vocal in their support of our inclusion,” he said.
Federal Government
Republicans attach five anti-LGBTQ riders to State Department funding bill
Spending package would restrict Pride flags on federal buildings, trans healthcare, LGBTQ envoys
As Congress finalizes its funding for fiscal year 2027, Republicans are attempting to include five anti-LGBTQ riders in the National Security and Department of State Appropriations Act.
A rider is an unrelated provision tacked onto a bill that must pass — in this instance, the bill provides funding for national security policy and for the State Department.
The riders range from restricting Pride flags in federal buildings to banning transgender healthcare, but all aim to limit the visibility and rights of LGBTQ Americans.
The five riders are:
Section 7067(a) prohibits Pride flags from being flown over federal buildings.
Section 7067(c) restricts the United States’ ability to appoint special envoys, representatives, or coordinators unless expressly authorized by Congress. These roles have historically been used to promote U.S. interests in international forums — including advancing human and LGBTQ and intersex rights and other policy priorities. The change would halt what the Congressional Equality Caucus describes as providing “critical expertise to U.S. foreign policy and leadership abroad.”
Section 7067(d) reinforces multiple anti-equality executive orders signed by President Donald Trump, effectively requiring that foreign assistance funded by the United States comply with those orders. This includes rescinding federal contractor nondiscrimination protections, including for LGBTQ people.
Section 7067(e) prohibits funding for any organization that provides or promotes medically necessary healthcare for trans people or “promotes transgenderism” — effectively banning funds for organizations that recognize trans people exist. This is despite the practice of gender-affirming care being supported by nearly every major medical association.
Section 7067(g) reinforces two global gag rules put forward by the Trump-Vance administration. One is the Trans Global Gag Rule, which prohibits foreign assistance funding for organizations that acknowledge the existence of trans people or advocate for nondiscrimination protections for them, among other activities. The second is the DEI Global Gag Rule, which prohibits foreign assistance funding for organizations that engage in efforts to address the ongoing effects of racism, sexism, and other forms of bigotry outside the United States.
The global gag rule has its roots in anti-abortion policy introduced by President Ronald Reagan in 1984, when the 40th president barred foreign organizations receiving U.S. global health assistance from providing information, referrals, or services for legal abortion, or from advocating for access to abortion services in their own countries. Planned Parenthood notes that the policy also affects programs beyond abortion, including efforts to expand access to contraception, prevent and treat HIV/AIDS, combat malaria, and improve maternal and child health.
If organizations funded by the State Department engage in these activities, they could lose funding.
This anti-LGBTQ push aligns with broader actions from the Trump-Vance administration since the start of Trump’s second term, which have focused on restricting human rights — particularly those of trans Americans.
The House Appropriations Committee is responsible for drafting the appropriations legislation. U.S. Rep. Tom Cole (R-Okla.) serves as chair, with U.S. Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.) as ranking member. The committee includes 34 Republicans and 27 Democrats.
For FY27 appropriations, Congress is supposed to pass and have the president sign the funding bills by Sept. 30, 2026.
Noticias en Español
The university that refuses to let go
Joanna Cifredo is a trans woman participating in University of Puerto Rico strike
Over the past days, I have been walking with a question that refuses to leave me. Not the kind of question you answer from a desk or from a distance, but one that grows out of what you witness in real time, at the gates, in the faces of those who remain there without knowing how any of this will end. What is truly happening inside the University of Puerto Rico, and why have so many students decided to risk everything at a moment when they can least afford to lose anything.
I write as someone who lives just steps away from the Río Piedras campus. These days, the silence has replaced the constant movement that once defined this space. The absence is felt in every corner where students used to pass at all hours. Since arriving in Puerto Rico three years ago, I have come to know firsthand stories that rarely make it into reports or official statements. One of the reasons I chose to stay was precisely this, to serve the university community, to help create a space where students could find something as basic as a safe meal at night and, in some way, ease burdens that are often carried in silence.
I have listened, asked questions, and tried to understand without imposing answers. What I have found is not a collective outburst or a generational whim. What exists is a fracture, a deep break between those making decisions and those living with their consequences every single day.
There has been an effort to reduce this strike to an issue of order, scheduling, or academic disruption. Conversations revolve around missed classes, delayed semesters, and students supposedly unaware of the consequences of their actions. What is rarely addressed are the conditions that lead an entire student body to pause its own future to sustain a protest that offers no guarantees.
Because that is the reality. These are students who fully understand what they are risking, and yet they remain. When someone reaches that point, the least they deserve is not judgment, but to be heard.
From the outside, there have also been attempts to discredit what is happening. Familiar narratives are repeated, legitimacy is questioned, and doubt is cast over intentions. It is easier to do that than to acknowledge that this did not begin at the gates, but long before, in decisions made without building trust.
And something must be said clearly. This is not limited to the gates of Río Piedras. What we are witnessing extends across every unit of the University of Puerto Rico system. Mayagüez, Ponce, Arecibo, Bayamón, Cayey, Humacao, Carolina, Aguadilla, Utuado, and the Medical Sciences Campus. This is not an isolated reaction. It is a movement that runs through the entire institution. Río Piedras may be more visible, but it is not alone. What is happening there reflects a broader unrest felt across the system.
Within that context, one demand has grown increasingly present, the call for the resignation of University of Puerto Rico President Zayira Jordán Conde. This is not the voice of a small group. It reflects a deeper level of mistrust that has spread across multiple campuses.
The Puerto Rican Association of University Professors has also made it clear that this is not solely a student issue. There is real concern among faculty, and a shared recognition of the conditions currently shaping the university. When students and professors arrive at the same conclusion, the problem can no longer be minimized.
Meanwhile, the administration continues to speak in the language of dialogue. But dialogue is not a word, it is a practice. And when trust has been broken, it cannot be restored through statements alone, but through decisions that prove a willingness to truly listen.
In the midst of all of this, there are voices that cannot be ignored. Voices grounded not in theory, but in lived experience. One of them is Joanna Cifredo, a student at the Mayagüez campus, a young Puerto Rican trans woman, and someone widely recognized for her advocacy.
I spoke with her in recent days. What follows is her voice, exactly as it is.
How would you describe what is happening inside the University of Puerto Rico right now, beyond what people see from the outside?
Estamos viviendo momentos muy difíciles, en el sentido de que hay mucha incertidumbre y una presión constante por parte de la administración para reabrir el recinto, pero, entre todo el caos e inestabilidad provocado por las decisiones de esta administración, también hemos vivido momentos muy poderosos. Esta lucha ha sacado lo mejor de nuestra comunidad.
Lo vimos en las asambleas y plenos, donde 1,500, 1,700, hasta 1,800 estudiantes llegaron —bajo lluvia, bajo advertencias de inundaciones— y aun así se quedaron, participaron y votaron a favor de una manifestación indefinida hasta que se atiendan nuestros reclamos.
He conocido a tantas personas en los diferentes portones, estudiantes graduados, aletas, estudiantes de intercambio, estudiantes de todo tipo de concentraciones y se unieron para apoyar el movimiento estudiantil. Estudiantes que vienen a los portones después del trabajo o antes de trabajar. Estudiantes que vienen a dejar agua y suministros entre turnos de trabajo. Viejitos que vienen a los portones con desayuno, almuerzo o cena.
Más allá de lo que se ve desde afuera, lo que estamos viviendo es una mezcla de tensión y resistencia, pero también de comunidad, solidaridad y compromiso colectivo.
Much of what is discussed remains at the level of headlines or social media. From your direct experience, what specific decisions or actions from the administration have led to this level of mobilization?
Desde el inicio, la designación de la Dra. Zayira Jordán Conde careció de respaldo dentro de la comunidad universitaria. No contaba con experiencia administrativa en la UPR ni con un conocimiento básico de nuestros procesos, cultura y reglamentos. Por eso, en asamblea, el estudiantado votó para solicitarle a la Junta de Gobierno que no considerara su candidatura, y múltiples organizaciones docentes hicieron lo mismo. Existía un consenso amplio de que no tenía la experiencia necesaria para liderar una institución como la nuestra.
A pesar de ese rechazo claro, la Junta de Gobierno decidió ignorar los reclamos de la comunidad universitaria e imponer su nombramiento.
Una vez en el cargo, su estilo de gobernanza ha sido poco transparente y poco colaborativo. Sin embargo, el detonante principal de la movilización en el Recinto Universitario de Mayagüez fue su decisión de destituir, de manera unilateral y en medio del semestre, a cinco rectores, incluyendo al nuestro, el Dr. Agustín Rullán Toro, para reemplazarlo por un rector interino, el Dr. Miguel Muñoz Muñoz.
Esta acción, tomada de forma abrupta, provocó de inmediato un clima de caos e inestabilidad dentro de la institución. Y deja una pregunta inevitable: ¿no anticipó el impacto de esa decisión, lo que evidenciaría una falta de experiencia? ¿O lo anticipó y aun así decidió proceder? No está claro cuál de las dos es más preocupante.
Además, esta decisión tuvo consecuencias concretas para el estudiantado, incluyendo el retiro de becas educativas para nuevos integrantes del RUM por parte de la Fundación Ceiba, que calificó la movida como “sorprendente” y “preocupante”. Decisiones impulsivas como la que tomó la presidenta ponen en peligro la estabilidad de nuestra institución y la acreditación de la universidad.
As a trans woman within this movement, how does your identity intersect with what is happening, and why does this also shape the future of people like you?
Soy una de varias chicas trans que formamos parte activa de este movimiento estudiantil.
For those outside the UPR who believe this does not affect them, what are the real consequences of this crisis?
La Universidad de Puerto Rico se fundó para servir al pueblo.
It is impossible to overstate the role the University of Puerto Rico and its students have played in shaping the social, cultural, and economic life of this country. Its impact extends into science, medicine, and every profession that has sustained Puerto Rico over time. No other educational institution has contributed more.
After listening to her, one thing becomes undeniable. This is not just another protest, but a generation refusing to let go of what little remains within its reach. And when a generation reaches that point, the issue is no longer the strike, the issue becomes the country itself.
National
Advocacy groups issue US travel advisory ahead of World Cup
Renee Good’s death in Minneapolis among incidents cited
More than 100 organizations have issued a travel advisory for the U.S. ahead of the 2026 World Cup.
The World Cup will take place in the U.S., Canada, and Mexico from June 11-July 19.
“In light of the deteriorating human rights situation in the United States and in the absence of meaningful action and concrete guarantees from FIFA, host cities, or the U.S. government, the undersigned organizations are issuing this travel advisory for fans, players, journalists, and other visitors traveling to and within the United States for the June 2026 FIFA Men’s World Cup. World Cup games will be played in 11 different cities across the United States, which, like many localities, have already been the target of the Trump administration’s violent and abusive immigration crackdown,” reads the advisory that the Council for Global Equality and other groups that include the American Civil Liberties Union issued on April 23. “The impacts of these policies vary by locality.”
“While the Trump administration’s rising authoritarianism and increasing violence pose serious risks to all, those from immigrant communities, racial and ethnic minority groups, and LGBTQ+ individuals have been and continue to be disproportionately targeted and affected by the administration’s policies and, as such, are most vulnerable to serious harm when traveling to and/or within the United States,” it adds. “This travel advisory calls on fans, players, journalists, and other visitors to exercise caution.”
The advisory specifically mentions Renee Good.
A U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent on Jan. 7 shot and killed her in Minneapolis. Good, 37, left behind her wife and three children.
The full advisory can be read here.
Republicans attach five anti-LGBTQ riders to State Department funding bill
Calendar: May 1-7
The university that refuses to let go
Judge issues revised order in Capital Pride stalking case
New Zealand blood donation rules shift
House Republicans push nationwide ‘Don’t Say Gay’ bill
From red carpet to chaos: A first-person narrative of the WHCD shooting
LGBTQ people are leaving Orthodox Judaism behind
European Parliament backs EU-wide conversion therapy ban
Democracy Forward files FOIA request for State Department bathroom policy records
-
Federal Government3 days agoHouse Republicans push nationwide ‘Don’t Say Gay’ bill
-
The White House4 days ago
From red carpet to chaos: A first-person narrative of the WHCD shooting
-
News3 days ago
LGBTQ people are leaving Orthodox Judaism behind
-
European Union2 days ago
European Parliament backs EU-wide conversion therapy ban
