Connect with us

National

Obama cheered at Pride reception

POTUS pledges to certify ‘Don’t Ask’ repeal in matter of ‘weeks, not months’

Published

on

President Obama addresses audience at White House Pride reception (Blade photo by Michael Key)

President Obama addressed on Wednesday at a White House Pride reception an adoring audience of LGBT supporters who seemed largely unaffected by discontent over his lack of support for marriage equality.

Upon Obama’s entrance in the East Room of the White House, the few hundred attendees, largely made up of U.S. government workers and grassroots organizers, greeted Obama with applause and shouts of approval.

During his eight-minute speech, Obama’s most noteworthy remark was an announcement that he expects to certify “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal “in a matter of weeks, not months.”

“A lot of people said we weren’t going to be able to get ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ done, including a bunch of people in this room,” Obama said. “It took two years through Congress — working with [Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff] Adm. [Mike] Mullen and [Defense] Secretary [Robert] Gates and the Pentagon. We had to hold together a fragile coalition. We had to keep up the pressure. But the bottom line is we got it done.”

Obama also said he’s kept his promises to LGBT Americans, although he added he recognizes more work remains on the LGBT political agenda and he’s relying on his audience to continue the pressure.

“So bottom line is, I’ve met my commitments to the LGBT community,” Obama said. “I have delivered on what I promised. Now, that doesn’t mean our work is done. There are going to be times where you’re still frustrated with me. I know there are going to be times where you’re still frustrated at the pace of change. I understand that. I know I can count on you to let me know. This is not a shy group.”

Among the attendees were high-ranking openly gay officials within the Obama administration, including John Berry, director of the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, and Nancy Sutley, chair of the White House Council on Environmental Quality. As attendees mingled and ate hors d’oeuvres from the White House kitchen, a band played light jazz and R&B music in the background.

Despite increased pressure to endorse marriage equality, Obama made no explicit endorsement of same-sex marriage during his speech. However, he did mention the recently passed marriage law in New York — and possibly alluded to litigation and ballot initiatives related to the right to marry — while listing ways in which “progress” is happening throughout the country.

“It’s propelled not by politics but by love and friendship and a sense of mutual regard and mutual respect,” Obama said. “It’s playing out in legislatures like New York. It’s playing out in courtrooms. It’s playing out in the ballot box, as people argue and debate over how to bring about the changes where we are creating a more perfect union.”

No attendees at the White House reception shouted complaints or heckled Obama to urge him to back same-sex marriage, unlike at a LGBT fundraiser in New York City last week.

Obama’s lack of explicit support for endorsement of same-sex marriage continues to rile many activists who  say he continues to miss chances to lead on the issue. In addition to staying mum on his personal views on marriage during the Pride reception, Obama declined to endorse marriage equality during a news conference earlier in the day and during the fundraiser in New York City last week

Still, many suspect Obama backs same-sex marriage without actually saying so and is waiting until after Election 2012 to come out for gay nuptials as a political calculation.

John Aravosis, the gay editor of AMERICAblog, said Obama offered “nice remarks” during the reception, but missed another opportunity to come out in favor of same-sex marriage.

“He seems to be intentionally dragging out his decision on the issue,” Aravosis said. “I think he does us, the issue, and himself a disservice in doing that. The longer he drags the issue out, the more he’s simply going to annoy marriage advocates, ultimately stealing his own thunder when he does finally come out in favor of marriage.”

But attendees at the event weren’t bothered by the president’s lack of support for same-sex marriage and said they would continue supporting him because of all the other work he’s done for the LGBT community.

Gregory King, a gay 55-year-old who works as a spokesperson for the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, said he supports Obama because he’s “done more for the LGBT community than any president in history.”

Asked whether he wants Obama to support same-sex marriage, King replied, “I’m sure, in time, President Obama will do the right thing, but he has consistently shown greater support than any other politician who has ever been elected president, and I think on a day like today, it’s worth saying, ‘Thank you.'”

Caleb Laiseki, a gay 16-year-old anti-bullying activist, said he wasn’t disappointed that Obama didn’t express personal support for same-sex marriage during the reception.

“Altogether, he has been the president that has made the most progress when it comes to safe schools, LGBT youth, LGBT elderly,” Laiseki said. “He has pushed the movement more than any other president, and the administration has pushed forward the movement more than any other administration has.”

Laiseki added that he thinks Obama’s support for same-sex marriage “will come in time,” but maintained he’s not disappointed because he continues to see progress from the administration on LGBT issues.

Dan Savage (right) attended the Pride reception with his partner Terry Miller (Blade photo by Michael Key)

Straddling both sides of the issue was Dan Savage, who’s gay and founder of the “It Gets Better” Project. While attending the reception with his partner, Terry Miller, Savage wore on his shirt an “Evolve Already” button referencing an earlier remark by Obama that his views on same-sex marriage could change.

“I think the gay community needs to keep the pressure on, which is why I wore the button today, but we also need take ‘yes’ for an answer, and we need to reward progress when it appears,” Savage said. “We’ve seen progress and we should support the president, and continue to make demands on the president.”

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

The White House

Trump tells Fox News he won the ‘gay vote’ — but polls tell a different story

Trump falsely claims LGBTQ support on Fox despite polling showing overwhelming opposition.

Published

on

President Donald Trump at the State of the Union in February 2025. (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

President Donald Trump claimed he won the “gay vote” in 2024, despite evidence showing otherwise.

While appearing by phone on Fox News’s panel show “The Five” on Thursday, Trump falsely claimed he performed particularly well among gay voters while discussing the ongoing war in Iran — a conflict he initiated without formal congressional approval.

“Now I think I did very well with the gay vote, OK? I even played the gay national anthem as my walk-off, OK?” Trump said on air.

“And I think it probably helped me. But I did great. No Republican’s ever gotten the gay vote like I did and I’m very proud of it, I think it’s great. Perhaps it’s because I’m from New York City, I don’t know…”

His claim contradicts 2024 polling from NBC News, which found that the GOP presidential ticket captured fewer than 1 in 5 LGBTQ male voters — a figure that may also include bisexual and transgender men. Trump’s support among LGBTQ female voters was even lower, at just 8%.

White LGBTQ voters favored Vice President Kamala Harris over Trump by a margin of 82% to 16%, while LGBTQ voters of color backed Harris by an even wider 91% to 5%.

Trump also used the appearance to criticize “Gays for Palestine,” saying: “Look at ‘Gays for Palestine’… they kill gays, they kill them instantly, they throw them off buildings, and I’m saying, ‘Who are the gays for Palestine?’”

He further pointed to his campaign’s use of the song “Y.M.C.A.” by the Village People — which he has repeatedly described as a “gay national anthem” — noting that it was frequently used as a walk-off song at rallies, as an indication that he and his campaign were supported by the gay community. The track, long associated with camp and hyper-masculine gay imagery, became a staple of Trump campaign events.

The Village People were later booked to perform at Turning Point USA’s inaugural ball celebrating Trump’s second inauguration. Lead singer Victor Willis previously criticized Trump’s use of the song dating back to 2020 and considered legal action to block it, but ultimately said there was “not much he can do about it.” He later acknowledged the renewed exposure was “beneficial” and “good for business,” boosting the song’s popularity and chart performance.

Despite Trump’s claims of strong support from gay voters, polling has consistently shown otherwise — even as several prominent gay men have held roles in or around his orbit, sometimes dubbed the “A-gays.” These include Richard Grenell, former executive director of the Kennedy Center and Special Presidential Envoy for Special Missions; Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent; Under Secretary of State Jacob Helberg; Department of Energy official Charles T. Moran; and longtime supporter Peter Thiel, co-founder and CEO of Palantir.

His efforts to portray himself as aligned with the gay community stand in conflict with policies advanced under his leadership. These include removing LGBTQ-related data from State Department reports, attempting to narrowly redefine gender identity in federal policy, restricting access to gender-affirming health care, and rolling back anti-discrimination protections. His administration also rescinded initiatives focused on LGBTQ health equity, data collection, and nondiscrimination in health care and education — moves advocates say contribute to stigma and worsen mental health outcomes.

Additionally, some HIV programs and community health centers have lost funding from the federal government after supporting initiatives inclusive of transgender people as a direct result of Trump-Vance policies.

Continue Reading

National

Anti-trans visa ruling echoes Nazi regime destroying trans documents

Trump administration escalates attacks on queer community

Published

on

The Trump administration has moved from identifying trans people as as threat to the family to claiming that trans people are a threat to the spiritual health of the nation. (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

The Lemkin Institute for Genocide Prevention and Human Security earlier this month released its third Red Flag Alert for the United States about the Trump administration’s anti-trans legislation. As the Lemkin Institute shared in the press release, “the Administration has moved from identifying transgender people as as threat to the family and to the nation’s military prowess to claiming that transgender people constitute a cosmic threat to the spiritual health of the nation and the great direct threat to the US national security in the world.”

The news came the same day that the State Department issued a new rule, “Enhancing Vetting and Combatting Fraud in the Immigrant Visa Program.” Under this new guidance, all visa applicants are required to disclose their “biological sex at birth” during all stages of the process, “even if that differs from the sex listed on the applicant’s foreign passport or identifying documentation.” 

This rule also orders that applicants to the green card lottery program share their passport information, so in knowingly collecting passport information that the agency knows will not match a person’s biological sex at birth, it’s creating grounds to deny trans peoples’ biases on the basis of “fraud,” Aleksandra Vaca of Transitics explains.

As is written in the new ruling, “the Department is replacing ‘gender’ with ‘sex’ in accordance with E.O. 14168, Defending Women From Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government, which provides that the term ‘sex’ shall refer to an individual’s sex at birth. Only male and female sex options are available for entrants completing the Diversity Visa entry form.” 

Along with outright denying the existence of nonbinary, genderqueer and gender expansive people, this policy creates a precedence for trans people to be stripped of their visas and deported because under 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(6)(C)(i), any foreigner found to have obtained or possess a visa “by fraud or willfully misrepresenting a material fact” will have their visa revoked and face deportation. 

By requesting information on “biological sex at birth,” the State Department is forcing a mismatch between documents and enabling officials to accuse trans, nonbinary, and gender expansive immigrants of fraud. Thus, trans and nonbinary immigrants can have their visas revoked and can be deported, and information gathered from immigrants during the visa request process can be added to federal databases and used by immigration authorities, including ICE agents. 

With the Supreme Court’s decision this past year allowing ICE officers to use racial profiling, Vaca argues that “now, The Trump administration has given ICE the reason it needs. Under this rule, ICE agents now have the enforcement rationale to assert that trans people–especially those belonging to racial minority groups–are more likely than cis people to have ‘misrepresented’ themselves during the visa process, and therefore, are more likely to enter the country ‘unlawfully.’”

This would enable ICE agents to target trans individuals specifically for being trans. If the goal of this were unclear, a day later the Trump administration released its statement for Women’s History Month 2026, writing that “we are keeping men out of women’s sports, enforcing Title IX as it was originally written and ensuring colleges preserve–and, where possible, expand–scholarships and roster opportunities for female athletes. We are restoring public safety and upholding the rule of law in every city so women, children, and families can feel safe and secure.”

And this is not the first time that ICE has targeted and harmed trans and nonbinary immigrants. Last June, Vera reported that ICE is not including trans people in detection in their public reports, and back in 2020, AFSC reported that trans people held in ICE detention faced “dreadful, ugly” conditions. 

While it seems like a new development in Trump’s anti-trans escalation, it echoes a deeply upsetting history of denying and destroying transgender people’s documents following members of the Nazi party seizing power in 1933. 

In the early 20th century, Weimar, Germany was an epicenter for gender affirming care with Maganus Hirschfeld’s Institute for Sexual Science. One of the first book burnings of the rising Nazi regime destroyed the Institute’s extensive clinical records and library on trans health and history by Nazi students and stormtroopers. In doing so, the Nazis effectively destroyed the world’s first trans health clinic and one of the richest and most comprehensive collective of information about trans healthcare. 

Similarly, the Nazi government invalidated or refused to recognize what was called “transvestite passes,” or passing certificates that allowed trans people to avoid arrest under Paragraph 175 which prohibited cross-dressing. During the Weimar Republic — the regime that preceded the Third Reich — recognized and affirmed the identities of trans people (in limited ways) with specific documentation that helped prevent them from arrest. Invalidating and disregarding these passes allowed police and Nazi officials to target trans people and harass, extort and arrest them, and the record of passes themselves helped officials target trans people. 

The changes to visa guidelines — alongside Kansas’s move to revoke trans drivers’ licenses last month — is reflective of this escalation of violence against trans people during the Nazi’s rise to power, which scholars like Dr. Laurie Marhoefer is just beginning to uncover. And along with the revocation of identification documents this past week, a recent Fourth Circuit Court ruled that states can deny Medicaid coverage for gender-affirming surgery.

The Fourth Circuit Court decision affirmed the Supreme Court’s decision in Skrmetti, which ruled that bans on gender affirming healthcare for young people are constitutional. This ruling extends this ban to include adult healthcare bans, allowing West Virginia’s exclusion of Medicaid coverage for adult gender affirming healthcare to take full effect. Even more upsetting was what the ruling itself said, calling gender affirming healthcare “dangerous.” 

As was written in the Fourth Circuit Opinion, “it’s not irrational for a legislature to encourage citizens ‘to appreciate their sex’ and not ‘become disdainful of their sex’ by refusing to fund experimental procedures that may have the opposite effect.” 

In reality, what this ruling and the opinion reflect, is the next step in government regulation and oversight over marginalized peoples’ bodies. From the overturn of Roe v. Wade, which removed federal protection of access to abortion, this next step represents the denial of people’s access to vital, lifesaving care–and to be clear, gender affirming care is not just for trans, nonbinary, and intersex people. It’s a dangerous escalation and one that echoes previous violence against trans people under fascist regimes; the Lemkin Institute is right to raise concern.

Continue Reading

Pennsylvania

Pa. House passes bill to codify marriage equality in state law

Governor supports gay state Rep. Malcolm Kenyatta’s measure

Published

on

Pennsylvania Capitol Building (Washington Blade file photo by Michael Key)

The Pennsylvania House of Representatives on Wednesday passed a bill that would codify marriage equality in state law.

House Bill 1800 passed by a 127-72 vote margin. Twenty-six Republicans voted for the measure.

The Republican-controlled Pennsylvania Senate will now consider the bill that state Rep. Malcolm Kenyatta (D-Philadelphia), who is the first openly gay person of color elected to the state’s General Assembly, introduced. Democratic Gov. Josh Shapiro supports the measure.

“Here in Pennsylvania, we believe in your freedom to marry who you love,” said Shapiro on Wednesday. “Today, the House has stepped up to protect that right.”

Continue Reading

Popular