National
A personal victory for gay Pentagon official
‘Don’t Ask’ repeal allows gay service members to become ‘whole’
Douglas Wilson, the Defense Department's assistant secretary for public affairs. (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)
For the first openly gay assistant secretary at the Pentagon, helping to advance “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal implementation has been a personally rewarding experience.
In an exclusive interview with the Washington Blade, Douglas Wilson, the Defense Department’s assistant secretary for public affairs, said Tuesday his role in bringing about the change has had particular significance for him because of his admiration for the nation’s armed forces.
“It’s meant a lot to me personally because it’s been an opportunity to help realize change in an institution that I respect tremendously,” Wilson said.
The process leading to gays serving openly in the U.S. military, Wilson said, has been important to him because he knows there are people in uniform who feel they “couldn’t be whole” as they served under “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”
“I know what it’s like to feel like you’re not a whole person,” he said. “This is why as the process of repeal took place, and then the process of certification took place, that was something that personally I kept upper-most in my mind. An institution that has done so much for people, that has produced so many outstanding people, that has done so much for the country itself could understand and recognize how important it is to be a whole person.”
Wilson, whom the Senate confirmed in February 2010 to a senior position at the Pentagon, serves as assistant secretary of defense for public affairs. His duties include being a principal adviser to Defense Secretary Leon Panetta on public information and community relations.
It’s not the Tuczon, Ariz., native’s first job at the Defense Department. Under former defense chief William Cohen during the Clinton administration, Wilson, 60, was a deputy assistant secretary for public affairs, and later principal deputy assistant under public affairs.
Wilson has had numerous other roles in government service and in work for non-profit organizations. Previously, he served as executive vice president of the Howard Gilman Foundation, where he oversaw the development and implementation of the organization’s domestic and international policy programs at its White Oak conservation center.
But in addition to his current duties at the Pentagon, Wilson had a direct role in bringing about “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal because he served on the executive committee for the Repeal Implementation Team.
“I’ve never seen myself as either a gay community leader or poster boy,” Wilson said. “I’ve always seen myself as a person with a whole lot of different components to me as an individual, and being gay is one of them.”
The culmination of that work took place when President Obama, Panetta and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Adm. Mike Mullen certified that the U.S. military is ready for open service. Under the repeal law signed in December, “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” will be off the books 60 days after certification — so the law will officially come to an end on Sept. 20.
In the Blade interview, Wilson discussed a variety of topics including what the lifting of the military’s gay ban means to him as well as implications for service members in the future. His partner of 16 years is an educator.
His piece of advice for gay service members after “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” is the off the books? Feel confident and believe you can be whoever you want to be.
“The military cliche, slogan is ‘be all that you can be,'” Wilson said. “Never has this been so true as it’ll be on Sept. 20 for thousands of people.”
Wilson had few words about potential partner benefits that could be offered to gay service members upon repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” because he’s “not a specialist on benefits.” Pentagon officials have said they intend to examine the possibility of extending certain benefits to gay service members — although the Defense of Marriage Act prohibits major benefits like housing and health insurance from going to service members.
“I wouldn’t want to speculate because I think all of these are on the table and I think there is a true determination here to do the right thing and to follow the law,” Wilson said.
Additionally, Wilson addressed the possibility of an executive order barring discrimination against troops based on sexual orientation and gender identity. LGBT advocates have called for the order because no non-discrimination rule will be put in place for the military even after “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” is lifted, but the Pentagon officials have said they don’t believe such an order is necessary.
Wilson said channels are already in place for gay service members to make complaints about discrimination while enabling the Pentagon to keep its policies sexual orientation-neutral. Still, Wilson left the door open for further discussion on a non-discrimination order.
“People here are aware that there are different views on this issue,” Wilson said. “I expect that discussion on this issue is going to continue but that is the rationale.”
The transcript of the interview between the Washington Blade and Wilson follows:
Washington Blade: You were involved in the Repeal Implementation Team as the Pentagon made its way toward certification. As an openly gay man, what did that role mean for you personally?
Doug Wilson: I was a member of the executive committee of the RIT, and I’ve also have been here as the assistant secretary of defense for public affairs since February of 2010, and I think I’m the first openly gay assistant secretary in the Pentagon’s history. It’s meant a lot to me personally because it’s been an opportunity to help realize change in an institution that I respect tremendously.
I served here in the late ’90s under [former Defense Secretary] Bill Cohen, and I had never in a million years thought that I would be working at the Pentagon. It was a transformational experience for me. I met the most outstanding people in uniform, and civilians as well. But the people I met in uniform were absolutely remarkable people. The things they were required to do and did, the sacrifices that they made — it made a huge impression on me.
It also made an impression on me that there were men and women in uniform who couldn’t be whole. And I know what it’s like to feel like you’re not a whole person. This is why as the process of repeal took place, and then the process of certification took place, that was something that personally I kept upper-most in my mind. An institution that has done so much for people, that has produced so many outstanding people, that has done so much for the country itself — could understand and recognize how important it is to be a whole person.
It has demonstrated that when it came to the integration of the armed forces. It has demonstrated that when it came to the role of women in combat. And I knew that it could demonstrate that when it came to allowing gay and lesbian men and women to be whole and equal.
Blade: But have you ever found it challenging or felt out of place working for a department that — had you been working on the uniform side — until recently would have forced you out of your job because of your sexual orientation?
Wilson: Yes. I have been well aware that as a political appointee and as a civilian that I was able to do things that my counterparts in uniform were not able to do.
I’ve never seen myself as either a gay community leader or poster boy. I’ve always seen myself as a person with a whole lot of different components to me as an individual, and being gay is one of them. The thing that mattered the most to me was the folks in uniform would be able to be that. To be recognized as that — that being gay or lesbian is a component of who they are. It was always uncomfortable that there was that gap.
Blade: Do you feel like you’ve experienced any sort of anti-gay bias or discrimination while working at the Pentagon?
Wilson: No. Even when I was here in the late ’90s and I was quite close to secretary and Mrs. Cohen. They knew my sexual orientation, they extended their hands and welcomed me and at social events welcomed me and my partner. That meant a tremendous amount to me.
I felt the same way being here as an assistant secretary for public affairs, particularly within the office that I had, which consists of a large number of military as well as civilian, political appointees — all of whom know that I’m openly gay, all of whom have been nothing but supportive. It’s not been a factor … it’s a part of who I am, and that’s how I’ve been treated.
Blade: Are there any openly gay figures in government who’ve inspired you to be out?
Wilson: I don’t know that there’s been anybody who’s inspired me to be openly gay. I think that there are figures in government who are friends, who I’m proud to call colleagues — people like John Berry, people like Eric Fanning, who used to work for me at [Business Executives for National Security], is now here with the Navy. … I work with a large number of men and women in this government who are openly gay and lesbian. Certainly on the Hill, there’s an even larger number who are.
I think the thing that — we’re all extremely different people. But I think the approach is similar, that this is a component of who we are. I don’t think John Berry looks at himself as the gay director of [the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.] I think he looks at himself as the director of OPM, and he’s a gay man. That’s how I approach what I’m doing here.
As I say, everybody has their own path in life that they follow, and whether you’re gay or straight how you come to be who you are is your own path. For me, it’s wanting to be accepted for everything that I am in terms of the whole person that I am.
It took a long time to get here because I grew up in the ’50s and ’60s when it was a very, very different time, and it’s been a long time coming, and I’m really proud of who I am. I’m proud of this institution. I’m proud of this administration, and mostly I’m proud of the literally thousands of people who are going to be able to take advantage of the opportunities that I’ve been able to advantage of earlier.
Blade: Did you know Pete Williams, the openly gay former Defense Department spokesperson?
Wilson: Yes I did. He was not openly gay. He was not open when he was here.
Blade: But he has since come out.
Wilson: I believe he has. You’ll have to ask him. I mean, I can’t speak for him. It’s very well known, but you’ll have to ask him how he wants to be characterized, but I feel very confident in saying I’m the first openly gay assistant secretary in any capacity here.
Blade: What was going through your head when certification was happening last week? Were you reflecting on anything personally?
Wilson: Yes. I was reflecting on the process that it took to get to this place in terms of repeal. In December of last year, it was kind of a crucible. And there were points during that month when people thought this ultimately was not going to happen, including very senior people here. And I never did believe that it wasn’t going to happen.
I thought that we really had reached a tipping point in December when [Sen.] Susan Collins stood on the floor after that vote on the [fiscal year 2011 defense] authorization [bill], and, within a couple of hours, she and [Sen. Joseph] Lieberman were back down there talking to [Senate Majority Leader Harry] Reid, and they were going to offer this bill.
At that point, I thought this is not dead. I didn’t see how it could die. I thought there were so many chances to kill it, and it wouldn’t die. And I really thought that this was going to happen in December because I thought too many people could not look themselves in the face, look themselves in the mirror and say — with a report that showed what it showed, that attitudes in the United States being what they were — that they were the ones to be the anachronism. I won some money as a result of that.
Blade: You won some money? How is that?
Wilson: I bet it would happen.
Blade: How much did you win?
Wilson: Let’s put it this way. I won enough for a round of drinks for a few people at JR.’s if I had gone.
Blade: Some conservatives have criticized the decision to certify repeal at this time. Chairman Buck McKeon of the House Armed Services Committee called certification the culmination a “flawed repeal assessment and adoption process” and said he’s disappointed Obama didn’t address “concerns expressed by military service chiefs.” What’s your response to that?
Wilson: Everybody has their own opinion with regards to the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal and it would inappropriate for me wearing the hat that I wear to make any particular comments on any particular person’s point of view.
I would just say that I thought that the Comprehensive Working Group Report truly reinforced the fact that in the military — as well as outside the military — views have changed considerably and that this is not something that is being forced, that this is something that is evolving.
I personally knew that we had reached this point when I saw some of the outreach sessions that were conducted during the report. I can tell you an anecdote. You’ll never be able to fit this into the story, but I will if you don’t mind.
Blade: Go ahead.
Wilson: When I was at Ft. Hood, and after the outreach sessions, we went to see a tank at a tank crew. The purpose of it was to show how close quarters were in a tank and how difficult it would be for gay and straight troops to serve together.
So, we saw the tank, and at the end, the tank crew lined up in front of the tank, and people said to us, “Do you have any questions?” And I said, “You all have served together several years.” And they said, “Yes, we’ve been together a long time.” I said, “What happens if ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ is repealed and one of you told the other four that he was gay? What would you do?”
And person by person — the first person said, “Well, my brother’s gay, so it doesn’t matter.” The second person said, “Well, you know, I have so many friends who are gay from high school. It doesn’t matter.” To each person, it didn’t matter. And the final person said, “What matters to me is if this thing is burning, I want someone to be able to pull me out, and I don’t care what their [sexual] orientation is.”
That’s when I knew. That’s when I knew. Everybody is entitled to their opinion. That’s my opinion.
Blade: Do you have any advice for gay service members in this period after certification but before “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” is off the books?
Wilson: I would say this has been a lengthy process. The length of it has been frustrating for some people. I understand both the frustration and the need for the process because this a very large institution and cultural change does not turn on a dime, but the evolution of the cultural change that has brought us to this point means that we don’t need to spike the football, what we need to do is understand that a lot of people have spent a lot of effort who are not gay to help us to get to this point.
I would say there are 60 days left because that is part of the legislation and we’ve come this far. Let us reach the end.
Blade: What about after that time? When “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” is off the books, what advice would you have for them?
Wilson: Feel confident in yourself, believe in yourself that you can be whoever you want to be. This is the statement that you are a whole person, that your sexual orientation is a part of who you are and it is not a limiting factor to who you can be. Take pride in that.
The military cliche, slogan is “be all that you can be.” Never has this been so true as it’ll be on Sept. 20 for thousands of people.
Blade: Now that recruiters are soon going to be able to take on openly gay people, do you foresee some kind of special outreach or advertising to the LGBT community to search for talent in the armed forces?
Wilson: Here’s what’s very interesting right now about the recruiting process, and that is, for a variety of reasons, all of the services are more than meeting their goals. It’s harder, rather than easier, to get into the services because of that. So, I guess I would say it’s important to make clear that everybody’s welcome, and it’s important to make clear to everybody that their talents are needed. It’s also important to understand that the openings are going to be limited, so you want the best, and the best include both gay and straight individuals.
Blade: But could you see, for example, an ad in the Washington Blade asking for people to enlist?
Wilson: Sure. Let’s put it this way. When the circumstances warrant that we need more people, then I can see an ad in the Washington Post, in the Washington Blade, in the Washington Times, and in the Washington Examiner.
Blade: Pentagon officials have said the issue of benefits for gay service members is going to be examined in the 60-day period before “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” is off the books. Which benefits do you think we’ll most likely see?
Wilson: I don’t know the answer to that. And I wouldn’t want to speculate because I think all of these are on the table and I think there is a true determination here to do the right thing and to follow the law.
The Pentagon has been put in a very interesting position by the courts over the past six months, and each step along the way, they have followed the law whatever the law is at that time. With regard to benefits, I think they want to look at each and every issue, they want to be able to determine it based on the law, whatever the law is now, whatever the law will be in 2012 or 2013 or 2014 — that will apply as well. So, I guess I would just say that nothing is off the table, but I wouldn’t want to advance guess the process.
Blade: Just to clarify … some of the major spousal benefits — housing and health insurance — those are prohibited from going to gay service members because of the Defense of Marriage Act. Do you see any possible workaround to offering those benefits to gay service members even with DOMA in place?
Wilson: I have to be honest with you, Chris. This is an area where I couldn’t give you the best answer because I’m not the specialist on benefits; I’m just not. All I would say is there is certainly a recognition here by the Repeal Implementation Team — both military and civilian — of the benefits that are extended to those in uniform, of the ones that for the moment, are not or cannot be because of the law, and people are looking at all of those.
Blade: One issue affecting gay service members has led to an ACLU lawsuit — the half separation pay that many service members face if they’ve been discharged under “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” It’s my understanding this could be changed administratively. Will the Pentagon make this change after “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” is off the books?
Wilson: Again, I don’t know the answer. I’m being very honest with you. I don’t know the answer to the question; I wouldn’t speculate about the answer to the question. The only thing I would say is I’m well aware that that is an issue that is going to be raised.
Blade: I think I’m going to get the same answer here, but I’ll ask anyway. Another issue that is facing discharged service members is recoupment costs. Some who have been discharged under “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” are required to pay back bonuses they’ve received or grants they received for ROTC tuition —
Wilson: You would get the same answer. … None of these issues or concerns are secrets or surprises to people. The people here are aware of all of them. The one thing — you asked me about my impressions of this team — one of the things that has most impressed me about this repeal implementation team is the degree to which the people who are leading it, particularly the people like [Marine Corps Maj.] Gen. Steve Hummer and [Virginia] “Vee” Penrod. … These are truly outstanding humans. These are people who want to do the right thing. I do not sense a prejudiced bone in their body.
Blade: The issue of non-discrimination is still a concern. There have been some calls for the president to issue an executive order prohibiting discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity. There’s been some talk in the briefings that we don’t need to have this executive order. Why is that?
Wilson: The position that has been articulated is because there are channels. There are channels for raising these complaints, and the approach has been — on as any many issues as you possibly can do — to not have to change the policy if the policy already is sexual orientation neutral. And that’s the view here that this policy is sexual orientation neutral. People here are aware that are different views on this issue. I expect that discussion on this issue on this issue is going to continue but that is the rationale.
Blade: There’s also been concern that openly transgender people are still unable to serve in the U.S. military. Do you think that “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal will open the door to open trans service?
Wilson: I don’t know the answer to that. I honestly don’t know the answer to that. I guess my own personal opinion is I think the issue of benefits is going to be the first issue after the 60 days, the most immediate issue of the set of the issues that are going to be addressed. The continuing issue of benefits, I think those are going to be addressed in the 60-day period and beyond. So, I think if I had to guess what are going to be the most near-term topics of discussion, it’ll be some of the benefits issues that you raised.
National
What to watch for in 2026: midterms, Supreme Court, and more
Federal policy battles carry grave implications for LGBTQ Americans
With the start of a new year comes a new slate of legal and political developments poised to change our world. From consequential Supreme Court cases and a potential House of Representatives leadership flip to preparations for the United States’s 250th anniversary, 2026 is expected to be a critical year—particularly as LGBTQ rights, and transgender rights specifically, remain a focus of national debate.
Across Congress, the courts, federal agencies, and statehouses, decisions made this year are poised to shape the legal and political landscape for LGBTQ Americans well beyond the next election cycle.
Congress
In 2026, a sizable number of federal seats will be up for grabs. All 435 districts in the U.S. House of Representatives will be on the ballot, offering Democrats a chance to flip the chamber and reclaim a measure of control from Republicans, who have held the House since 2022. Control of the House will be especially critical as lawmakers weigh legislation tied to civil rights, health care access, and the scope of federal protections for LGBTQ Americans.
A Democratic majority would also determine committee leadership, oversight priorities, and the ability to block or advance legislation related to transgender health care, education policy, and federal nondiscrimination protections.
Several House races are expected to be particularly significant for LGBTQ representation and leadership, including contests in Texas’s 32nd Congressional District, New York’s 17th, and Illinois’s 9th.
In Texas’s 32nd District, Democratic incumbent Julie Johnson is seeking reelection in the northeastern Dallas-area seat. Johnson is the first openly LGBTQ person ever elected to Congress from Texas or the South, according to her congressional website. Her reelection bid comes amid Republican efforts to redraw the district to consolidate GOP power, following demands from President Trump — moves that have made the race increasingly challenging.
While in office, Johnson has pushed for expanded Medicare access, stronger LGBTQ rights protections, and broader health care equity. The race has become a key test case for LGBTQ incumbents navigating increasingly hostile political and electoral environments, particularly in southern states.
In New York’s 17th Congressional District, Democrat Cait Conley is mounting a challenge against Republican incumbent Mike Lawler in the lower Hudson Valley, just north of New York City. Conley is a former active-duty Army officer who was deployed six times and has leaned into that experience to connect with the district’s mixed constituency.
The district has frequently flipped between parties and includes a politically influential conservative Hasidic community, making it one of the more competitive seats in the region. An out lesbian, Conley has spoken forcefully in support of LGBTQ rights and has received the endorsement of LPAC, positioning herself as a pro-equality candidate in a closely watched race that could help determine control of the House.
The Illinois 9th Congressional District is also shaping up to be a competitive open-seat contest. The district spans parts of Cook, Lake, and McHenry counties and includes much of Chicago’s North Side. In 2025, Democratic Rep. Jan Schakowsky announced she would not seek reelection after representing the district since January 1999.
Mike Simmons, who was elected to the Illinois State Senate in 2021, is seeking the seat. Simmons was the first openly LGBTQ person and the first Ethiopian American elected to the state Senate, where he has focused on expanding LGBTQ rights, strengthening democratic institutions, and addressing cost inequities in health care, housing, and support for community-based organizations. Given the district’s suburban makeup, the race could emerge as a frontline contest for pro-equality legislative influence.
If Democrats are successful in reclaiming control of Congress, the outcome would reshape leadership at the highest levels. One potential result would be Hakeem Jeffries becoming the first elected Black Speaker of the House, a historic milestone with implications for legislative priorities, representation, and the direction of Democratic leadership.
Beyond the House, control of the U.S. Senate will also be in play. In total, 35 of the Senate’s 100 seats will be up for election in 2026. Of those, 33 are regularly scheduled races, with two additional special elections set to take place in Florida and Ohio. Several of these contests are expected to hinge on issues such as abortion access, federal oversight, judicial confirmations, and the future of LGBTQ protections at the national level. Political observers view the Senate as a tougher flip for Democrats but not an impossible task.
Governorships
Gubernatorial races will further shape the policy environment across the country. A total of 36 states and three U.S. territories could elect new governors in 2026, many of whom will have significant influence over education policy, health care access, and the enforcement—or rollback—of civil rights protections.
One notable development is Republican Sen. Marsha Blackburn’s entry into Tennessee’s gubernatorial race. Blackburn has been an outspoken opponent of LGBTQ rights and has previously proposed constitutional amendments aimed at banning same-sex marriage, making the race one to watch closely for LGBTQ advocates.
Two races to watch
Colorado governor’s race:
Jared Polis made history in 2018 as the first openly gay man elected governor in U.S. history, but his tenure in the Mile High State is coming to a close. Polis cannot run for reelection in 2026 because of term limits. U.S. Sen. Michael Bennet and Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser are the Democratic frontrunners in a race that could determine whether the state continues its trajectory on LGBTQ-inclusive policy.
Iowa Senate seat:
Zach Wahls is running for Iowa’s U.S. Senate seat. An Iowa State Senator, Wahls has built a record focused on expanding health care access, minimizing government corruption, and protecting LGBTQ equality. Wahls, who was famously raised by two lesbian moms, has frequently pointed to his family as shaping his advocacy, positioning his campaign around personal experience as well as legislative record.
SCOTUS
The Supreme Court is expected to issue several rulings this year that could have far-reaching consequences for LGBTQ rights nationwide. Two of the most closely watched issues involve transgender athletes in school sports and the legality of conversion therapy bans.
Two cases heard in 2025 involving transgender athletes in school sports—West Virginia v. B.P.J. and Little v. Hecox—are expected to receive rulings later this year. Oral arguments are scheduled for Jan. 13, with the Court poised to determine whether states can ban transgender girls and women from participating on girls’ sports teams.
Legal experts have warned that the decisions could carry broader civil rights implications beyond athletics, potentially reshaping interpretations of sex discrimination and Title IX protections across education and employment.
The Court is also expected to rule on the future of conversion therapy bans and whether such restrictions are protected under the First Amendment. In October 2025, the justices heard oral arguments in Chiles v. Salazar, a case that will determine whether state and local bans on conversion therapy for LGBTQ youth violate free speech or free exercise of religion protections. A ruling in favor of the plaintiffs could weaken or overturn bans that have been enacted in dozens of states and municipalities.
Federal policy changes
Several new federal policies are being implemented as the year takes shape, with some of the most immediate impacts falling on LGBTQ people. One of the most significant changes is the elimination of gender-affirming care coverage for federal employees.
The policy, put into place by President Trump’s Office of Personnel Management, eliminates health insurance coverage for most gender-affirming medical care in the Federal Employees Health Benefits (FEHB) and Postal Service Health Benefits (PSHB) programs. The change affects hundreds of thousands of federal workers and their families.
The Human Rights Campaign has filed a lawsuit against the OPM policy, alleging that the change violates Title VII’s ban on sex discrimination in employment. Advocates argue that the policy not only limits access to medically necessary care but also signals a broader federal retreat from LGBTQ-inclusive health protections.
Similar proposals are under consideration for the broader American public, including efforts to restrict Medicaid and Medicare coverage for gender-affirming care—moves that could disproportionately impact low-income transgender people, people with disabilities, and those living in rural areas.
Historic anniversaries
In 2026, several historic anniversaries will take place nationwide. The most prominent is the United States’ Semiquincentennial, marking 250 years since the Declaration of Independence. Events are planned across the country, from small-town commemorations to large-scale national celebrations in Washington, D.C.
Among the most anticipated events is the July 4 celebration commemorating 250 years since independence from Great Britain, which is expected to be one of the largest national events of the year.
However, the anniversary planning has already created ripple effects. Capital Pride—Washington’s annual Pride celebration—was forced to move from the second week of June to the third week after the White House announced plans for a large June 14, 2026 celebration on the South Lawn marking President Trump’s 80th birthday.
The White House said the event will include a large-scale Ultimate Fighting Championship (UFC) exhibition involving boxing and wrestling competitions, a decision that has drawn scrutiny from LGBTQ advocates amid ongoing concerns about federal priorities and messaging during a landmark year for the nation.
It also marks 11 years since SCOTUS ruled same-sex marriage is legally protected nationwide with Obergefell v. Hodges.
Minnesota
Tim Walz drops out of Minn. governor’s race
The longtime LGBTQ ally and Democratic party figure blames ongoing fraud investigations supported by Trump and the GOP for his withdrawal.
Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz announced Monday that he is withdrawing from the 2026 Minnesota governor’s race, citing what he described as political interference and attacks from Republican Party leaders.
Walz made the announcement on social media, where the post quickly gained traction, drawing more than 30,000 likes on Instagram and 23,000 reactions on Facebook.
In his statement, the incumbent governor directly blamed President Donald Trump and his allies, both in Washington and in Minnesota, for fueling what he characterized as politically motivated accusations of widespread fraud tied to federal nutrition programs in the state.
According to a 2024 ABC News story, more than 70 people have been charged as part of a “wide-ranging criminal conspiracy” that allegedly exploited two federally funded nutrition programs during the COVID-19 pandemic, resulting in more than $250 million in fraudulent claims.
“I won’t mince words here,” Walz wrote. “Donald Trump and his allies — in Washington, in St. Paul, and online — want to make our state a colder, meaner place. They want to poison our people against each other by attacking our neighbors. And, ultimately, they want to take away much of what makes Minnesota the best place in America to raise a family.”
In his announcement, Walz also cited recent reports from Somali American child care center operators in Minnesota who said they have faced violent threats and vandalism after right-wing YouTuber Nick Shirley posted a video alleging fraud at their facilities. Following the video’s release, the Trump-Vance administration cut federal child care funding nationwide.
Walz also criticized the federal government’s decision to withhold child care funding from states amid the allegations.
“They’ve already begun by taking our tax dollars that were meant to help families afford child care,” he added. “And they have no intention of stopping there.”
Last week, a Department of Health and Human Services official confirmed that the Trump administration is pausing child care funding to all states following the Minnesota allegations, stating that funds will be released “only when states prove they are being spent legitimately.”
“Republicans are playing politics with the future of our state,” Walz said. “And it’s shameful.”
Walz previously served as the Democratic vice presidential nominee alongside then–Vice President Kamala Harris during her unsuccessful 2024 presidential campaign.
Meanwhile, longtime Trump ally and MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell announced in December that he is running for Minnesota governor and has already received Trump’s endorsement.
Walz has been a longtime ally of the LGBTQ community, dating back to 1999, when he served as a football coach and teacher at Mankato West High School in Mankato, Minnesota, about 80 miles southwest of Minneapolis.
It is also possible that U. S. Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) is considering entering the race to succeed him.
National
Top 10 LGBTQ national news stories of 2025
Trump, Supreme Court mount cruel attacks against trans community
President Trump’s anti-LGBTQ agenda dominated national news in 2025, particularly his cruel attacks on trans Americans. Here are our picks for the top 10 LGBTQ news stories the Blade covered in 2025.
10. Trump grants clemency to George Santos
President Donald Trump granted clemency to disgraced former Long Island Rep. George Santos. Santos was sentenced to 87 months in federal prison after pleading guilty to wire fraud and aggravated identity theft and had served just 84 days of his more than seven-year sentence. He lied to both the DOJ and the House Ethics Committee, including about his work and education history, and committed campaign finance fraud.
9. U.S. Olympics bans trans women athletes
The United States Supreme Court decided in 2025 to take up two cases — Little v. Hecox and West Virginia v. B.P.J.— both of which concern the rights of transgender athletes to participate on sports teams. The cases challenge state laws under the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment, which prevents states from offering separate boys’ and girls’ sports teams based on biological sex determined at birth. Both cases are set to be heard in January 2026. The developments follow a decision by the United States Olympic & Paralympic Committee to change eligibility rules to prohibit transgender women from competing in women’s sporting events on behalf of the United States, following Trump’s Executive Order 14201, “Keeping Men Out of Women’s Sports.”
8. FDA approves new twice-yearly HIV prevention drug
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration on June 18 approved a newly developed HIV/AIDS prevention drug that needs to be taken only twice a year, with one injection every six months. The new drug, lenacapavir, is being sold under the brand name Yeztugo by pharmaceutical company Gilead Sciences. According to trial data, 99.9 percent of participants who received Yeztugo remained HIV negative. This emerging technology comes amid direct cuts to HIV/AIDS research measures by the Trump–Vance administration, particularly targeting international HIV efforts such as PEPFAR.
7. LGBTQ people ‘erased’ from gov’t reports
Politico reported in March that the Trump–Vance administration is slashing the State Department’s annual human rights report, cutting sections related to the rights of women, people with disabilities, the LGBTQ+ community, and more. Members of Congress objected to the removal of the subsection on “Acts of Violence, Criminalization, and Other Abuses Based on Sexual Orientation, Gender Identity or Expression, or Sex Characteristics (SOGIESC)” from the State Department’s Annual Country Reports on Human Rights Practices.
In a Sept. 9 letter to Secretary of State Marco Rubio, U.S. Reps. Robert Garcia (D-Calif.), Julie Johnson (D-Texas), and Sarah McBride (D-Del.) urged the department to restore the information or ensure it is integrated throughout each report, noting that the reports serve as key evidence for asylum seekers, attorneys, judges, and advocates assessing human rights conditions and protection claims worldwide.
6. Trump admin redefines ‘sex’ in all HHS programs
The Trump administration canceled more than $800 million in research into the health of sexual and gender minority groups. More than half of the National Institutes of Health grants scrapped through early May involved studies of cancers and viruses that disproportionately affect LGBTQ people.
The administration is also pushing to end gender-affirming care for transgender youth, according to a new proposal from the Department of Health and Human Services, NPR reported. The administration is considering blocking all Medicaid and Medicare funding for services at hospitals that provide pediatric gender-affirming care. “These rules would be a significant escalation in the Trump administration’s attack on access to transgender health care,” said Katie Keith, director of the Center for Health Policy and Law at Georgetown University.
5. FBI plans to label trans people as ‘violent extremists’
The Human Rights Campaign, Transgender Law Center, Equality Federation, GLAAD, PFLAG, and the Southern Poverty Law Center condemned reports that the FBI, in coordination with the Heritage Foundation, may be working to designate transgender people as “violent extremists.” The concerns followed a report earlier this month by independent journalist Ken Klippenstein, who cited two anonymous national security officials saying the FBI is considering treating transgender subjects as a subset of a new threat category.
That classification—originally created under the Biden administration as “Anti-Authority and Anti-Government Violent Extremists” (AGAAVE) — was first applied to Jan. 6 rioters and other right-wing extremists. Advocates said the proposal appears to stem from the false claim that the assassination of Charlie Kirk was committed by a transgender person.
4. Pentagon targets LGBTQ service members
Acting in agreement with the growing anti-LGBTQ sentiment from the Trump administration, during a televised speech to U.S. military leaders at Marine Corps Base Quantico in late September, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth denounced past military leadership for being too “woke,” citing DEI initiatives and LGBTQ inclusion within the Department of Defense. During the 45-minute address, Hegseth criticized inclusive policies and announced forthcoming directives, saying they would ensure combat requirements “return to the highest male standard only.”
Since 2016, a Navy replenishment oiler had borne the name of gay rights icon Harvey Milk, who served in the Navy during the Korean War and was separated from service under other than honorable conditions due to his sexuality before later becoming one of the first openly LGBTQ candidates elected to public office. In June 2025, the ship was renamed USNS Oscar V. Peterson.
The U.S. Air Force also announced that transgender service members who have served between 15 and 18 years would be denied early retirement and instead separated from the military without benefits. Transgender troops will be given the option of accepting a lump-sum payout offered to junior service members or being removed from service.
In February, the Pentagon said it would draft and submit procedures to identify transgender service members and begin discharging them from the military within 30 days.
3. Trump blames Democrats, trans people for gov’t shutdown
Republicans failed to reach an agreement with Democrats and blamed them for the government shutdown, while Democrats pointed to Republicans for cutting health care tax credits, a move they said would result in millions of people paying significantly higher monthly insurance premiums next year. In the White House press briefing room, a video of Democrats discussing past government shutdowns played on a loop as the president continued to blame the Democratic Party and “woke” issues, including transgender people.
“A lot of good can come from shutdowns. We can get rid of a lot of things. They’d be Democrat things,” Trump said the night before the shutdown. “They want open borders. Men playing in women’s sports. They want transgender for everybody.”
2. Supreme Court joins attacks on LGBTQ Americans
The U.S. Supreme Court issued multiple rulings this year affecting LGBTQ people. In Mahmoud v. Taylor (6–3), it ruled that public schools must give parents advance notice and the option to opt children out of lessons on gender or sexuality that conflict with their religious beliefs. The case arose after Montgomery County, Md., schools added LGBTQ-inclusive storybooks to the elementary curriculum.
In June, the court upheld Tennessee’s ban on gender-affirming care for transgender minors, protecting similar laws in more than 20 states. Lawmakers and advocates criticized the ruling, and a coalition of seven medical associations warned it strips families of the right to direct their own health care.
The Court also allowed the Trump administration to enforce a ban on transgender military personnel and to implement a policy blocking passports with “X” gender markers, with the federal government recognizing only male and female designations.
1. Trump inaugurated for second time
President Donald Trump became the 47th president after winning Wisconsin, securing 277 of the 270 electoral votes needed. His guidebook, Project 2025, outlined the Republican Party’s goals under his new leadership, with a particular focus on opposing transgender rights.
Trump nominated openly gay hedge fund executive Scott Bessent as U.S. Treasury Secretary, a role he eventually assumed. Bessent became the highest-ranking openly gay U.S. government official in American history.
Honorable mention: The war on rainbow crosswalks escalates around the country
Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) ordered state transportation officials to remove a rainbow-colored crosswalk in Orlando next to the Pulse gay nightclub, where 49 mostly LGBTQ people were killed in a 2016 mass shooting. The move follows a July 1, 2025, announcement by U.S. Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy that, with support from President Trump, the department adopted a “nationwide roadway safety initiative” that political observers say could be used to require cities and states to remove rainbow street crosswalks.
Steny Hoyer, the longest-serving House Democrat, to retire from Congress
Just say no to the felon in the White House
‘Hedda’ brings queer visibility to Golden Globes
Colombians protest against Trump after he threatened country’s president
Kennedy Center renaming triggers backlash
The year in photos
Safer Ways to Pay for Online Performances and Queer Events
Two pioneering gay journalists to speak at Thursday event
Blade travels to Colombia after U.S. forces seize Maduro in Venezuela
