National
Paul latest to surge as Iowa caucuses approach
Romney, Gingrich remain at top of national polls
The GOP presidential race continues to twist and turn two weeks before the Iowa caucuses as libertarian Rep. Ron Paul surges and hopes to win the first in the series of contests that will determine who will take on President Obama in 2012.
Paul, who’s represented Texas in the U.S. House since 1997, has risen to the top of the pack in the most recent polls asking Iowa Republicans which candidate they prefer as the caucuses approach on Jan. 3.
According to an InsiderAdvantage/Majority Opinion Research poll published Sunday, Paul has support from 23.9 percent among Iowa Republicans who say they’ll vote in the caucuses. Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney comes in second with support from 18.2 percent, followed by Texas Gov. Rick Perry at 15.5 percent and former U.S. House Speaker Newt Gingrich at 12.9 percent.
A victory for Paul in Iowa could complicate matters for other Republican presidential candidates who are enjoying support nationwide. According to a national CNN/ORC International poll published on Monday, Romney and Gingrich are tied for the lead at 28 percent, while Paul comes in third at 14 percent.
Paul’s record is distinctive among other Republicans in the race as being more pro-LGBT than others.
The lawmaker voted on two separate occasions in 2004 and 2006 against a Federal Marriage Amendment that would have banned same-sex marriage throughout the country. Paul was among the five Republicans who voted for “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal on the House floor in May even before the Pentagon released its report in November 2010.
Paul has also been unique among his fellow GOP candidates on the issue of same-sex marriage by saying the federal government should get out of the business of regulating marriage — in keeping with his libertarian views. He is one of a few who hasn’t signed the National Organization for Marriage’s pledge to oppose same-sex marriage as president — much to the consternation of the organization.
According to the Boston Globe, Paul articulated his thoughts on marriage on Wednesday while speaking to students at Straight A Academy, a small non-traditional private school in Manchester, N.H., in response to a question from the audience.
“Why should the government be telling you what marriage is all about?” Paul was quoted as saying. “You might have one definition. I have another definition.”
Paul reportedly said he personally believes marriage is between one man and one woman, but said regulations involving marriage should be up to the states. He then advocated creating a secular agreement for relationship recognition in which, “you can go to court to resolve the differences and the arguments over it.” A Paul spokesperson later clarified no federal benefits would be conferred as a result of these contracts such as tax benefits.
But Paul has expressed support for the Defense of Marriage Act and has been been critical of the Obama administration’s decision to no longer defend the anti-gay law in court. Paul issued a statement condemning the announcement when it was made in February.
“Today’s announcement that the Obama administration will abandon its obligation to enforce DOMA is truly disappointing and shows a profound lack of respect for the Constitution and the Rule of Law,” Paul said in a statement at the time.
The lawmaker has also voted against hate crimes protections legislation. Paul didn’t vote on a version of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act when it came to the House floor in 2007.
R. Clarke Cooper, executive director of the Log Cabin Republicans, said Paul’s positions on LGBT issues are “founded on his perspective of states’ rights.”
“For him, it’s more of the principle that people should be able to live their lives as they choose without the government impeding on that,” Cooper said.
But Jerame Davis, interim executive director of the National Stonewall Democrats, said Paul’s “constant refrain of states rights” is what is most troubling about his candidacy.
“States don’t have rights in and of themselves — they are just another division of government that derives their power from the people,” Davis said. “The states rights argument has been used to perpetrate some of the worst aspects of American history. It scares the hell out of me to hear someone running for president use this refrain, especially when you consider Ron Paul’s opposition to the Civil Rights Act was based, at least partially, on this notion.”
Anti-gay Iowa leader endorses Santorum
In related news, a leading anti-gay activist in Iowa threw his support behind Republican presidential candidate Rick Santorum in an endorsement on Tuesday — a decision that may give the trailing candidate a boost in the polls.
Bob Vander Plaats, CEO of FAMiLY LEADER, said during a news conference that Santorum could be “the Huckabee in this race,” referring to the former Arkansas governor and social conservative favorite Mike Huckabee who won the Iowa caucuses in 2008.
“I saw him as a champion for the family in the U.S. House, I saw him as a champion for the family in the U.S. Senate. I saw him as a champion for the family on the campaign trail,” Vander Plaats said. “So today, I, as an individual, am going to endorse Rick Santorum. I’m going to mobilize whatever resources that I have at my disposal to advocate for him.”
Vander Plaats, who ran unsuccessfully for Iowa governor in 2010, has been working against marriage rights for same-sex couples in Iowa since the State Supreme Court ruled in favor of such rights in 2009. The activist led the successful effort to unseat three justices who ruled in favor of marriage equality during a 2010 referendum.
Chuck Hurley, who heads the FAMiLY LEADER’s Iowa Family Policy Center, also endorsed Santorum. These endorsements are personal and not on behalf of FAMiLY LEADER, they both have said. During the news conference, Vander Plaats said the board “reached unanimity” that the organization wouldn’t endorse any particular candidate during the Iowa caucuses.
Troy Price, executive director of the pro-LGBT group One Iowa, said Vander Plaats’ endorsement of Santorum “comes as no surprise” and demonstrates he’s “out of touch” with what voters want.
“Both Santorum and Vander Plaats have built their careers attacking loving and committed gay and lesbian couples, and the fact is that Vander Plaats caved to the extreme social conservative agenda,” Price said. “With poll numbers lagging, it is clear Rick Santorum does not have a chance against President Obama in November, and Vander Plaats has endorsed a losing candidate.”
According to the Des Moines Register, Santorum was eating a cinnamon roll in Pella, Iowa after a campaign stop when he found out about Vander Plaats’ and Hurley’s endorsement.
“There’s a lot of good people out here running, and I’m sure it was a tough decision. I think it shows that we’re the candidate right now that has the momentum, that has the message that’s resonating to the people of Iowa,” Santorum said.
Santorum has had a long history of anti-gay views and positions, even during the course of his time representing Pennsylvania in the Senate from 1995 to 2006. Santorum was one of the architects of the Federal Marriage Amendment. In an interview with the Associated Press, Santorum made notorious comments equating homosexuality to bestiality and pedophilia.
“In every society, the definition of marriage has not ever to my knowledge included homosexuality,” Santorum was quoted as saying. “That’s not to pick on homosexuality. It’s not, you know, man on child, man on dog, or whatever the case may be. It is one thing. And when you destroy that you have a dramatic impact on the quality.”
Following the remarks, Dan Savage, a Seattle-based gay activist, launched an effort to coin the word “santorum” as a sexual neologism. That definition remains the No. 1 result of “santorum” when the word in entered into Google.
Over the course of his campaign, Santorum has been emphasizing anti-gay views and his opposition to same-sex marriage perhaps more than any other presidential candidate. In addition to pledging to reinstate “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” Santorum said “our country will fail” as a result of same-sex marriage. He also raised eyebrows in August when he said same-sex marriage is like “saying this glass of water is a glass of beer.”
Santorum is also among the candidates who has signed a pledge from the National Organization for Marriage committing himself to, among other things, backing the Federal Marriage Amendment and defending the Defense of Marriage Act in court.
Despite Vander Plaat’s endorsement, Santorum trails the other candidates. The CNN/ORC International poll revealed Santorum has support from just 4 percent of Republicans nationwide. The candidate is one of only a few candidates in the Republican field who hasn’t experienced a surge sometime over the course of his campaign.
The polling results are similar in Iowa, despite the strong presence of evangelical voters in the state. The InsiderAdvantage/Majority Opinion Research found that Santorum has support from just 3.8 percent of registered Republicans who are set to vote in the caucuses.
Federal Government
Treasury Department has a gay secretary but LGBTQ staff are under siege
Agency reverses course on LGBTQ inclusion under out Secretary Scott Bessent

A former Treasury Department employee who led the agency’s LGBTQ employee resource group says the removal of sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI) from its discrimination complaint forms was merely a formalization of existing policy shifts that had already taken hold following the second inauguration of President Donald Trump and his appointment of Scott Bessent — who is gay — to lead the agency.
Christen Boas Hayes, who served on the policy team at Treasury’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) from 2020 until March of this year, told the Washington Blade during a phone interview last week that the agency had already stopped processing internal Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) complaints on the basis of anti-LGBTQ discrimination.
“So the way that the forms are changing is a procedural recognition of something that’s already happening,” said Hayes. “Internally, from speaking to two EEO staff members, the changes are already taking place from an EEO perspective on what kind of cases will be found to have the basis for a complaint.”
The move, they said, comes amid the deterioration of support structures for LGBTQ workers at the agency since the administration’s early rollout of anti-LGBTQ executive orders, which led to “a trickle down effect of how each agency implements those and on what timeline,” decisions “typically made by the assistant secretary of management’s office and then implemented by the appropriate offices.”
At the end of June, a group of U.S. House Democrats including several out LGBTQ members raised alarms after a Federal Register notice disclosed Treasury’s plans to revise its complaint procedures. Through the agency’s Office of Civil Rights and EEO, the agency would eliminate SOGI as protected categories on the forms used by employees to initiate claims of workplace discrimination.
But Hayes’s account reveals that the paperwork change followed months of internal practice, pursuant to a wave of layoffs targeting DEI personnel and a chilling effect on LGBTQ organizing, including through ERGs.
Hayes joined Treasury’s FinCEN in 2020 as the agency transitioned into the Biden-Harris administration, working primarily on cryptocurrency regulation and emerging technologies until they accepted a “deferred resignation” offer, which was extended to civil servants this year amid drastic staffing cuts.
“It was two things,” Hayes said. “One was the fact that the policy work that I was very excited about doing was going to change in nature significantly. The second part was that the environment for LGBTQ staff members was increasingly negative after the release of the executive orders,” especially for trans and nonbinary or gender diverse employees.
“At the same time,” Hayes added, “having been on the job for four years, I also knew this year was the year that I would leave Treasury. I was a good candidate for [deferred resignation], because I was already planning on leaving, but the pressures that emerged following the change in administration really pushed me to accelerate that timeline.”
Some ERGs die by formal edict, others by a thousand cuts
Hayes became involved with the Treasury LGBTQ ERG shortly after joining the agency in 2020, when they reached out to the group’s then-president — “who also recently took the deferred resignation.”
“She said that because of the pressure that ERGs had faced under the first Trump administration, the group was rebuilding, and I became the president of the group pretty quickly,” Hayes said. “Those pressures have increased in the second Trump administration.”
One of the previous ERG board members had left the agency after encountering what Hayes described as “explicitly transphobic” treatment from supervisors during his gender transition. “His supervisors denied him a promotion,” and, “importantly, he did not have faith in the EEO complaint process” to see the issues with discrimination resolved, Hayes said. “And so he decided to just leave, which was, of course, such a loss for Treasury and our Employee Resource Group and all of our employees at Treasury.”
The umbrella LGBTQ ERG that Hayes led included hundreds of members across the agency, they said, and was complemented by smaller ERGs at sub-agencies like the IRS and FinCEN — several of which, Hayes said, were explicitly told to cease operations under the new administration.
Hayes did not receive any formal directive to shutter Treasury’s ERG, but described an “implicit” messaging campaign meant to shut down the group’s activities without issuing anything in writing.
“The suggestion was to stop emailing about anything related to the employee resource group, to have meetings outside of work hours, to meet off of Treasury’s campus, and things like that,” they said. “So obviously that contributes to essentially not existing functionally. Because whereas we could have previously emailed our members comfortably to announce a happy hour or a training or something like that, now they have to text each other personally to gather, which essentially makes it a defunct group.”
Internal directories scrubbed, gender-neutral restrooms removed
Hayes said the dismantling of DEI staff began almost immediately after the executive orders. Employees whose position descriptions included the terms “diversity, equity, and inclusion” were “on the chopping block,” they said. “That may differ from more statutorily mandated positions in the OMWI office or the EEO office.”
With those staff gone, so went the infrastructure that enabled ERG programming and community-building. “The people that made our employee resource group events possible were DEI staff that were fired. And so, it created an immediate chilling effect on our employee resource group, and it also, of course, put fear into a lot of our members’ hearts over whether or not we would be able to continue gathering as a community or supporting employees in a more practical way going forward. And it was just, really — it was really sad.”
Hayes described efforts to erase the ERGs from internal communication channels and databases. “They also took our information off internal websites so nobody could find us as lawyers went through the agency’s internal systems to scrub DEI language and programs,” they said.
Within a week, Hayes said, the administration had removed gender-neutral restrooms from Main Treasury, removed third-gender markers from internal databases and forms, and made it more difficult for employees with nonbinary IDs to access government buildings.
“[They] made it challenging for people with X gender markers on identification documents to access Treasury or the White House by not recognizing their gender marker on the TWAVES and WAVES forms.”
LGBTQ staff lack support and work amid a climate of isolation
The changes have left many LGBTQ staff feeling vulnerable — not only because of diminished workplace inclusion, but due to concerns about job security amid the administration’s reductions in force (RIFs).
“Plenty of people are feeling very stressed, not only about retaining their jobs because of the layoffs and pending questions around RIFs, but then also wondering if they will be included in RIF lists because they’re being penalized somehow for being out at work,” Hayes said. “People wonder if their name will be given, not because they’re in a tranche of billets being laid off, but because of their gender identity or sexual orientation.”
In the absence of functional ERGs, Hayes said, LGBTQ employees have been cut off from even informal networks of support.
“Employees [are] feeling like it’s harder to find members of their own community because there’s no email anymore to ask when the next event is or to ask about navigating healthcare or other questions,” they said. “If there is no ERG to go to to ask for support for their specific issue, that contributes to isolation, which contributes to a worse work environment.”
Hayes said they had not interacted directly with Secretary Bessent, but they and others observed a shift from the previous administration. “It is stark to see that our first ‘out’ secretary did not host a Pride event this year,” they said. “For the last three years we’ve flown the rainbow Pride flag above Treasury during Pride. And it was such a celebration among staff and Secretary Yellen and the executive secretary’s office were super supportive.”
“Employees notice changes like that,” they added. “Things like the fact that the Secretary’s official bio says ‘spouse’ instead of ‘husband.’ It makes employees wonder if they too should be fearful of being their full selves at work.”
The Blade contacted the Treasury Department with a request for comment outlining Hayes’s allegations, including the removal of inclusive infrastructure, the discouragement of ERG activity, the pre-formalization of EEO policy changes, and the targeting of DEI personnel. As of publication, the agency has not responded.
U.S. Supreme Court
Supreme Court to consider bans on trans athletes in school sports
27 states have passed laws limiting participation in athletics programs

The U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday agreed to hear two cases involving transgender youth challenging bans prohibiting them from participating in school sports.
In Little v. Hecox, plaintiffs represented by the ACLU, Legal Voice, and the law firm Cooley are challenging Idaho’s 2020 ban, which requires sex testing to adjudicate questions of an athlete’s eligibility.
The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals described the process in a 2023 decision halting the policy’s enforcement pending an outcome in the litigation. The “sex dispute verification process, whereby any individual can ‘dispute’ the sex of any female student athlete in the state of Idaho,” the court wrote, would “require her to undergo intrusive medical procedures to verify her sex, including gynecological exams.”
In West Virginia v. B.P.J., Lambda Legal, the ACLU, the ACLU of West Virginia, and Cooley are representing a trans middle school student challenging the Mountain State’s 2021 ban on trans athletes.
The plaintiff was participating in cross country when the law was passed, taking puberty blockers that would have significantly reduced the chances that she could have a physiological advantage over cisgender peers.
“Like any other educational program, school athletic programs should be accessible for everyone regardless of their sex or transgender status,” said Joshua Block, senior counsel for the ACLU’s LGBTQ and HIV Project. “Trans kids play sports for the same reasons their peers do — to learn perseverance, dedication, teamwork, and to simply have fun with their friends,” Block said.
He added, “Categorically excluding kids from school sports just because they are transgender will only make our schools less safe and more hurtful places for all youth. We believe the lower courts were right to block these discriminatory laws, and we will continue to defend the freedom of all kids to play.”
“Our client just wants to play sports with her friends and peers,” said Lambda Legal Senior Counsel Tara Borelli. “Everyone understands the value of participating in team athletics, for fitness, leadership, socialization, and myriad other benefits.”
Borelli continued, “The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit last April issued a thoughtful and thorough ruling allowing B.P.J. to continue participating in track events. That well-reasoned decision should stand the test of time, and we stand ready to defend it.”
Shortly after taking control of both legislative chambers, Republican members of Congress tried — unsuccessfully — to pass a national ban like those now enforced in 27 states since 2020.
Federal Government
UPenn erases Lia Thomas’s records as part of settlement with White House
University agreed to ban trans women from women’s sports teams

In a settlement with the Trump-Vance administration announced on Tuesday, the University of Pennsylvania will ban transgender athletes from competing and erase swimming records set by transgender former student Lia Thomas.
The U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights found the university in violation of Title IX, the federal rights law barring sex based discrimination in educational institutions, by “permitting males to compete in women’s intercollegiate athletics and to occupy women-only intimate facilities.”
The statement issued by University of Pennsylvania President J. Larry Jameson highlighted how the law’s interpretation was changed substantially under President Donald Trump’s second term.
“The Department of Education OCR investigated the participation of one transgender athlete on the women’s swimming team three years ago, during the 2021-2022 swim season,” he wrote. “At that time, Penn was in compliance with NCAA eligibility rules and Title IX as then interpreted.”
Jameson continued, “Penn has always followed — and continues to follow — Title IX and the applicable policy of the NCAA regarding transgender athletes. NCAA eligibility rules changed in February 2025 with Executive Orders 14168 and 14201 and Penn will continue to adhere to these new rules.”
Writing that “we acknowledge that some student-athletes were disadvantaged by these rules” in place while Thomas was allowed to compete, the university president added, “We recognize this and will apologize to those who experienced a competitive disadvantage or experienced anxiety because of the policies in effect at the time.”
“Today’s resolution agreement with UPenn is yet another example of the Trump effect in action,” Education Secretary Linda McMahon said in a statement. “Thanks to the leadership of President Trump, UPenn has agreed both to apologize for its past Title IX violations and to ensure that women’s sports are protected at the university for future generations of female athletes.”
Under former President Joe Biden, the department’s Office of Civil Rights sought to protect against anti-LGBTQ discrimination in education, bringing investigations and enforcement actions in cases where school officials might, for example, require trans students to use restrooms and facilities consistent with their birth sex or fail to respond to peer harassment over their gender identity.
Much of the legal reasoning behind the Biden-Harris administration’s positions extended from the 2020 U.S. Supreme Court case Bostock v. Clayton County, which found that sex-based discrimination includes that which is based on sexual orientation or gender identity under Title VII rules covering employment practices.
The Trump-Vance administration last week put the state of California on notice that its trans athlete policies were, or once were, in violation of Title IX, which comes amid the ongoing battle with Maine over the same issue.