National
Bachmann’s record is no laughing matter
Tea Party fave opposes LGBT rights; husband backs ‘ex-gay’ therapy
The anti-gay rhetoric and voting record of Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) came under scrutiny this week in the wake of her announcement that she would run for the White House in 2012.
In a speech last week in her hometown of Waterloo, Iowa, the Tea Party favorite pledged to continue advancing conservative causes as she formally declared her candidacy.
“I want to bring a voice, your voice, to the White House, just as I have brought your voice to the halls of Congress to secure the promise of the future for our generation and generations to come,” Bachmann said.
But based on her voting record in Congress since she started representing Minnesota in the U.S. House in 2007, a Bachmann presidency would likely be bad news for LGBT Americans.
In addition to voting against “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal and opposing the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, she also opposed hate crimes legislation.
Additionally, Bachmann has called for passage of a federal constitutional amendment that would ban same-sex marriage throughout the country, even though she was elected to Congress too late to vote on such a measure when it came before lawmakers.
As a state senator in Minnesota, Bachmann sponsored legislation to make a ban on same-sex marriage part of the state constitution. The amendment that Minnesota voters will vote on in 2012 is similar to the measure she proposed at that time.
Michael Cole-Schwartz, spokesperson for the Human Rights Campaign, predicted that a Bachmann presidency would mark a major setback for LGBT rights.
“A President Bachmann would mean a wholesale reversal from the gains we’ve seen over the past few years,” Cole-Schwartz said. “Not only would we see policy positions that hurt our families, the level of anti-LGBT rhetoric would no doubt rise as would the use of our community as a political wedge issue.”
The Bachmann campaign didn’t respond to the Washington Blade’s request for comment.
Bachmann could become a major player in the 2012 presidential campaign if she performs well in the early primary states and some experts have speculated that she would make a strong vice presidential pick. A favorite among the Tea Party wing of the GOP, Bachmann is already polling well in her home state of Iowa, where social conservatives tend to fare well in the GOP caucus.
According to a poll published June 26, Bachmann is nearly tied in Iowa with frontrunner, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney. The Des Moines Register Iowa Poll found that Romney was favored by 23 percent of likely Republican caucus-goers while Bachmann was supported by 22 percent.
Additionally, a poll published Wednesday by Public Policy Polling found Bachmann would place a strong second in the New Hampshire primary, even though the GOP in the state has more libertarian leanings. Romney leads in the state with the support of 25 percent of respondents, but Bachmann comes in second at 18 percent. She jumped 14 points in the last three months.
Bachmann has said recently that marriage should be left to the states to decide. However, she has always reiterated her support for the Federal Marriage Amendment — a contradiction because ratification of that measure would define marriage at the federal level.
During her appearance June 13 in the Republican presidential debate, Bachmann called for enactment of a Federal Marriage Amendment as she said she wouldn’t interfere with New Hampshire’s law allowing same-sex marriage.
“I do support a constitutional amendment on marriage between a man and a woman, but I would not be going into the states to overturn their state law,” Bachmann said.
Also during the debate, Bachmann said she would have kept “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” in place.
“I would want to confer with our commanders-in-chief and also with the Joint Chiefs of Staff because I want to know how it was being implemented and if it had the detrimental effects that have been suggested will come,” Bachmann said.
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Adm. Mike Mullen came out in favor of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal in February. Some of the military service chiefs — most notably Marine Corps Commandant Gen. James Amos — opposed repeal of the military’s gay ban before Congress acted to lift the law, but each has said they can implement open service.
R. Clarke Cooper, executive director of Log Cabin Republicans, acknowledged his organization and Bachmann don’t “see eye-to-eye” on LGBT issues, but said her more nuanced rhetoric on marriage was noteworthy.
“We’ve been arguing all along that DOMA is incursion on states rights,” Cooper said. “It’s interesting to see her kind of move in that direction because that’s a nuance. It doesn’t mean that she’s all of a sudden a champion of fundamental rights by any means, but it’s interesting that she’s being forced to shift.”
In addition to her anti-gay stances on marriage and the military, Bachmann has also engaged in anti-gay political rhetoric throughout her career.
The slightly more nuanced — if contradictory — position that Bachmman has adopted on marriage is different from what she previously stated. According to the Washington Post, Bachmann has called marriage “probably the biggest issue that will impact our state and our nation in the last, at least, 30 years.”
Additionally, in the fight to push for a same-sex marriage ban in Minnesota in 2004, Bachmann said a member of her family is gay and called it “a very sad life. It’s part of Satan.” According to the Post, her stepsister, Helen LaFave, is gay and in 2006 publicly opposed the ban.
Scott Dibble, a gay Democratic state senator in Minnesota, said in a Post interview that Bachmann argued that advancing gay rights could result in children being “lured into trying homosexuality out” and that “the reason for high divorce rates in Scandinavian countries was that they offered equality” to LGBT people.
But Bachmann could be overshadowed in her anti-gay views by her husband, Marcus Bachmann, a therapist who runs a faith-based counseling center. His practice reportedly offers discredited conversion therapy for LGBT people, although he’s said that he doesn’t try to convert gay people who say “they want to stay homosexual.”
In an interview last year with a Christian radio show, Marcus Bachmann compared gays to “barbarians” and said they “need to be educated, need to be disciplined.”
“Just because someone feels it or thinks it doesn’t mean that we are supposed to go down that road,” he said. “That’s what is called the sinful nature. We have a responsibility as parents and as authority figures not to encourage such thoughts and feelings from moving into the action steps.”
Marcus Bachmann is close to his wife’s political campaign. According to the Washington Post, Bachmann recently called himself his wife’s “strategist” and has acted as her media planner, travel assistant and personal shopper.
Despite Bachmann’s anti-gay record, Log Cabin’s Cooper said the country has grown more supportive of LGBT rights since the last presidential election and the GOP has noticed.
“Looking at where are we are in 2011 heading off the 2012 cycle, it’s a much different world than it was in the ’08 cycle, and a far different world than it was in ’04 and 2000,” Cooper said. “We’re in a much different state as a country than we have ever been, and it is going to force campaigns to evaluate these issues.”
National
HRC report: LGBTQ students face ‘far greater challenges’ in non-supportive states
Survey finds anti-LGBTQ school harassment, bullying highest in 17 states
The Human Rights Campaign Foundation, the educational arm of the national LGBTQ advocacy organization Human Rights Campaign, has released a report showing LGBTQ public school students are more likely to face bullying, harassment, and “other barriers” in states that have less overall supportive LGBTQ laws and policies.
The report is based on the HRC Foundation’s National Educator Survey of School Climate and Bullying, which was released on Sept. 17.
“The report finds that harassment, bullying, and other barriers to LGBTQ+ inclusion are more prevalent in states with limiting policies, where educators report widespread restrictions on LGBTQ+ resources, visible expressions of support, and assistance for transgender students,” a statement released by HRC says.
“As just one example,” the statement adds, “while 59 percent of educators in states with limiting policies report restrictions on supporting their transgender students, just 6 percent to 8 percent of educators in states with supportive policies report the same, underscoring the impact of these policies on school climate, student well-being, and the stakes of the upcoming midterm elections for LGBTQ+ youth and inclusive classrooms.”
The report says the survey consisted of responses by 826 educators in 42 states who worked as teachers, principals, counselors, administrators, and others who worked in support services. All worked at schools with students from pre-kindergarten to 12th grade, most being public schools and a smaller number being charter schools, the report says.
It says the survey was conducted between April 15 and May 21, 2026, and included a survey questionnaire with about 55 questions covering a wide range of LGBTQ related school issues.
According to the report, its classification of LGBTQ supportive and non-LGBTQ supportive states is based on a detailed analysis of the LGBTQ related laws and policies of all 50 states, D.C., and U.S. territories conducted by the Movement Advancement Project, or MAP, which describes itself as an “independent, nonprofit thinktank.”
The report includes a chart consisting of 51 boxes representing the 50 states and D.C., with 32 plus D.C. colored as blue and said to have overall LGBTQ supportive policies. The 17 boxes colored in red are said to have overall non-LGBTQ supportive policies and laws, Each of the boxes has the initial of a state or D.C. printed inside it.
In addition to D.C., the chart shows Maryland, Virginia, New York, California, and Massachusetts as among the supportive states. Florida, Texas, West Virginia, and Ohio are among the states shown to be non-LGBTQ supportive.
The HRC statement includes these “key” findings from the survey:
- In states with restrictive LGBTQ+ inclusion policies, 59 percent of educators report restrictions on supporting transgender students, compared to just 6-8 percent of educators in states with supportive LGBTQ+ inclusion policies.
- In states with restrictive policies, nearly 50 percent of educators reported restrictions on LGBTQ+ books or resources, compared to just 7 percent of educators in states with supportive policies.
- Roughly 32 percent of educators in states with restrictive policies reported anti-LGBTQ+ harassment was a moderate or serious problem, compared with 11 percent of educators in states with supportive LGBTQ+ inclusion policies.
- In states with restrictive LGBTQ+ inclusion policies, 29 percent of educators were very worried about anti-LGBTQ+ harassment, compared to 15 percent in states with supportive LGBTQ+ inclusion policies.
- In states with restrictive LGBTQ+ inclusion policies, 36 percent of educators witnessed anti-LGBTQ+ student bullying, compared to 27 percent in states with supportive LGBTQ+ inclusion policies.
- In states with supportive LGBTQ+ inclusion policies, 75 percent of educators reported no restrictions on LGBTQ+-supportive displays, highlighting a substantially more supportive school environment than in states with restrictive policies.
- Educators in states with restrictive LGBTQ+ inclusion policies also reported significant harassment of students based on appearance (57 percent), race or ethnicity (43 percent), sexual orientation (42 percent), and gender identity or expression (39 percent). (No direct comparison figure from supportive-policy states is provided in the data above.)
“Every young person deserves to feel safe and supportive at school, but this report makes clear that for too many LGBTQ+ students, especially transgender youth, are being failed by policies designed to exclude them,” said HRC President Kelley Robinson in the HRC statement.
“We know that when students feel seen, supported, and affirmed, they are more likely to thrive, but when schools become places of exclusion or hostility, young people pay the price through lower engagement, missed opportunities to learn, and poorer mental and physical health,” Robinson said.
The HRC statement notes that the survey findings come at a time when a growing number of states have passed laws targeting LGBTQ students and the school officials and teachers who support them. It says that for the first time, the survey found that “educators themselves are also experiencing anti-LGBTQ+ harassment, highlighting the growing impact of these policies on school staff as well as students.”
The full survey findings and report can be accessed here:
U.S. Supreme Court
Trump asks Supreme Court to allow restrictions on gender-affirming care in prisons
SCOTUS could further restrict rights of trans inmates
The Trump administration has asked the Supreme Court to allow its policy limiting gender-affirming treatment for federal inmates to take effect while a legal challenge plays out in court.
U.S. District Judge Royce Lamberth ordered the government to continue providing gender-affirming care, such as hormone therapy, which had become policy nearly a decade ago for inmates who were transitioning.
The Trump administration argues in its application that its policy restricting transgender rights was properly adopted and that the judge overstepped, posing nationwide “security and prison-administrative concerns.”
If allowed, the policy would halt surgeries, hormones and social accommodations such as wigs while allowing mental health therapy to continue as the legality of the policy reversal is litigated.
The government also argues in the application that the Bureau of Prisons had “determined that sex-trait-modification surgeries, hormone interventions in general, and social accommodations could no longer be justified as treatment for gender dysphoria.”
American Civil Liberties Union attorneys for the inmates said the policy is “a direct threat to the well-being of transgender people in federal custody and an open violation of their fundamental rights,” and said withholding necessary gender-affirming healthcare constitutes cruel and unusual punishment.
The Blade has covered the ongoing developments surrounding changes to Federal Bureau of Prisons transgender inmate policy that went into effect earlier in Trump’s term. The changes primarily focus on rolling back Biden-era protections for trans inmates.
Earlier this year, the Blade published a joint letter from multiple senators in response to the rollback of the policy. Multiple senators — including Edward Markey (D-Mass.), Jeffrey A. Merkley (D-Ore.) and Mazie K. Hirono (D-Hawaii) — sent a letter to Attorney General Todd Blanche and Federal Bureau of Prisons Director William Marshall III calling for them to reverse the policy change, saying it endangers inmates’ health and safety.
The senators described how the policy shift, along with President Trump’s Executive Order 14168, titled “Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government,” is forcing policy changes they argued are rooted more in political rhetoric than in medical research or evidence-based correctional practices.
Federal Bureau of Prisons responded to the Blade’s request for comment in May, declining to reconsider its transgender inmate policy.
The Blade reached out to the Federal Bureau of Prisons once again over the application to the Supreme Court, but did not hear back before publication.
Federal Government
Education Department rolls back protections for LGBTQ students under Title IX
The DoE policy rescinds Biden-era protections
The Department of Education rolled back a Biden-era Title IX interpretation on Monday that secured sex-based discrimination protections for students on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity.
Title IX was established in 1972 as landmark civil rights law. It prohibits sex-based discrimination in any school or any other education program that receives funding from the federal government.
Education Secretary Linda McMahon spoke about the revision of the policy, claiming the decision would explicitly help “women and girls.”
“Thanks to today’s action, the published Title IX regulations faithfully reflect court orders and congressional intent — reducing confusion for parents, students, and educational institutions. We will continue to relentlessly champion equal opportunity for all Americans and hold accountable any school or college that violates the rights, privacy, or athletic opportunities of our women and girls,” McMahon said via press release.
Prior to her work under the Trump-Vance administration, McMahon was a World Wrestling Federation/World Wrestling Entertainment executive before resigning to pursue a career in politics. She was appointed to the Connecticut State Board of Education by then-Gov. Jodi Rell in January 2009, but resigned from her role shortly afterward to run what ultimately became two failed campaigns for Connecticut’s U.S. Senate seat in 2010 and 2012.
A “fact sheet” provided by the Department of Education also called the inclusive sexual assault and gender identity protections expanded under the Biden-Harris unlawful, saying, “This change is necessary to provide clarity in the Code of Federal Regulations so that institutions, administrations, students, and families can see the rules that are actually in force and to help eliminate public confusion about the Biden administration’s unlawful attempt to stretch Title IX’s legal protections to cover ‘sexual orientation’ and ‘gender identity.’”
This is not the first time this policy has faced judicial hurdles. While Biden was still in office, the plan was struck down in multiple courts in Republican states.
Opponents of the move say it will harm transgender athletes and weaken protections for sexual assault victims.
“Sexual harassment and assault continue to be pervasive in schools and, to the fullest extent possible, we should be working to enforce the laws that protect student survivors of sexual violence. Yet, Education Secretary Linda McMahon and the Trump administration have decided to ignore what survivors need, instead weaponizing Title IX to attack trans students,” said Shiwali Patel, senior director of education justice at the National Women’s Law Center.
This is a return to a first Trump term policy after Biden issued an executive order to attempt to curb discrimination for all — especially those with different sexual orientations and gender identities — that had been given a pass during Trump’s first term. Much of Title IX’s policy has a narrow vision of what sex protections look like that often and enthusiastically leave gender-diverse and non-heterosexual people out.
In March 2021, President Joe Biden signed Executive Order 14021, “Guaranteeing an Educational Environment Free From Discrimination on the Basis of Sex, Including Sexual Orientation or Gender Identity,” to attempt to undo some of the flagrantly anti-LGBTQ policy the Trump-Pence administration had set forth relating to Title IX protections for LGBTQ students and sexual assault survivors.
The secretary focused this “win” for the administration as one more step toward restricting transgender students from competing in women’s sports, but the 2020 rule, completed under former Education Secretary Betsy DeVos, didn’t explicitly ban trans students from participating on sports teams consistent with their gender identity. It did limit the types of sexual harassment and assault complaints that schools had to investigate and required live hearings so male students could respond to accusations.
McMahon didn’t discuss those aspects in her statement or in requests for comment. The 2020 rule drew praise from conservatives and intense opposition from advocates who said it downplayed sexual abuse and left victims unprotected.
In a statement, U.S. Rep. Tim Walberg (R-Mich.), who chairs the House Education Committee, said, “Returning to the 2020 regulations restores longstanding protections for women and girls that the Biden-Harris administration attempted to dismantle and realigns Title IX policy with court precedents.”
LGBTQ activists have called this decision a direct attack on LGBTQ safety — particularly for trans students who continue to face a barrage of legislative, executive, and judicial attacks in recent years from the Trump-Vance administration.
Kelley Robinson, president of the Human Rights Campaign, the largest LGBTQ advocacy group in the world, released a statement following the DoE’s announcement.
“Title IX is, quite simply, about protecting students and ensuring that they are safe from abuse, harassment, and discrimination while they pursue their education. But Donald Trump and his cronies aren’t interested in any of that,” Robinson said. “Donald Trump’s Department of Education has completely lost sight of that mission. Instead of enforcing protections for students, they’re rescinding them. They don’t care if sexual harassment and assault go unaddressed. And they’re happy to strip funding away from school districts and states that are actually trying to keep students safe.
“We know who will be hurt: women, girls, and others who are vulnerable to sexual harassment, assault and abuse — including LGBTQ+ students. The fact that they’re dropping this rule into place abruptly, without a comment period, denying families, educators, loved ones, and the students themselves a say in how they should be treated, shows how little they care about the safety of our students.
“This is a monstrous injustice, and it drives home how essential it is that we take action at the polls this November to start bringing some accountability to an administration that has turned its back on the very students Title IX was written to protect,” she added.
The Washington Blade reached out to the DoE for comment and questions on whether Title IX protections still included LGBTQ students, and received this email response from Education Spokesman Sabin Sidney:
“Your questions indicate you are clearly missing the entire point of this Final Rule. The Biden Administration illegally rewrote Title IX to include ‘sexual orientation’ and ‘gender identification’ in the definition of sex-based discrimination. The Trump Administration is rescinding this rule—only after every federal court that heard legal challenges rejected it as unlawful.
“Since January 2025, the Department has been enforcing Title IX consistent with the President’s Executive Order grounded in biological truth that there are only two sexes. The Trump Administration is restoring the original promise of Title IX and providing clarity to students, parents, and educational institutions. We will vigorously defend equal opportunity consistent with the law’s intended purpose.”
