Connect with us

National

HUD: Religious groups must abide by LGBT non-bias rule

Frank praises administration’s ‘important policy’

Published

on

A Department of Housing & Urban Development official said Monday religious institutions receiving federal funds for housing programs will have to abide by a new HUD rule prohibiting discrimination against LGBT people.

John TrasviƱa, assistant secretary forĀ Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity, confirmed the rule would impact religious institutions during a conference callĀ in response to a question from the Washington Blade, saying, “All HUD housing providers are covered under this rule.”

Asked to clarify whether these providers include religious institutions,Ā TrasviƱa replied, “Yes.”

Ian Thompson, the ACLU’s legislative representative, first wrote inĀ a blog postingĀ on the ACLU’s siteĀ last week that the rule will cover religious institutions that receive money for federal programs.

“[T]he rule will requireĀ allĀ organizations that operate HUD-assisted or HUD-insured housing facilities to serve LGBT Americans looking for shelter and housing — including religious organizations,” Thompson said. “[O]nce a religious organization chooses to provide housing services or programs with the aid of federal funds and benefits from HUD, it cannot shield itself from traditional safeguards that protect civil rights in the provision of those services.”

Thompson added that religious organizations providing entirely private housing services are unaffected by the change.

“We are pleased that HUD said that all organizations must provide equal access to HUD housing programs and did not sanction the use of religion to discriminate,” Thompson concluded.

The rule,Ā first proposed in January, covers programs serving an estimated 5.5 million Americans, including those living in low-income subsidized housing.

The measure, which has four general components, requires owners and operators ofĀ HUD-assisted housing to make housing available to applicants and occupants regardless of their LGBT status.

The rule clarifies ā€œfamiliesā€ otherwise eligible for HUD programs can’t be excluded because of one or more members of the family’s sexual orientation, gender identity or marital status.

Additionally, the rule prohibits owners and operators of HUD-assisted housing or housing whose financing is insured by HUD from inquiring about the sexual orientation or gender identity of an applicant or occupant of a dwelling, whether renter or owner-occupied.

TrasviƱa said HUD clarified this provision doesn’t prohibit voluntary and anonymous reporting of LGBT status in state, local or federal data collection requirements.

Additionally, the measure has a bearing onĀ mortgage insurance programs.Ā It prohibits lenders from using LGBT status as a basis to determine a borrower’s eligibility for Federal Housing Administration-insured mortgage financing.

“These days, when one-third of new homebuyers are served by FHA lenders, this last element to make sure that one’s sexual orientation or gender identity is not a basis for denying an FHA loan is critically important to America’s families,”Ā TrasviƱa said.

TrasviƱa added that rule is “governed as a HUD program rule,” so, unlike the Fair Housing Act provision, HUD offices throughout the country will enforce it and not just the Office of Fair Housing & Equal Opportunity.

HUD Secretary Shaun Donovan announced on Saturday during a speech at the 24th annual Creating Change conference that HUD would this week make final the rule by publishing it in the Federal Register. On Monday, the department published the text of the final regulation.

TrasviƱa confirmed that the Federal Register would publish the rule this week, but in response to another Blade question said he couldn’t give a more definitive time for when the rule will be published.

“That’s a little bit out of our control,”Ā TrasviƱa said. “Typically, the rules get printed within a week once they’re submitted, so the rule has been submitted, we’re just waiting for its publication.”

Trasviña noted that publication of the rule will start the 30-day period before the measure will go into effect and expects the measure to go into effect starting in March.

In a statement provided by HUD, gay Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) commended the department for implementing the change, saying ā€œI am grateful to the Obama administration for instituting this important policy.”

 

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

Idaho

Idaho advances bill to restrict bathroom access for transgender residents

HB 752 passed in state House of Representatives on Monday

Published

on

The Idaho Capitol building in downtown Boise. (Photo by Rigucci/Bigstock)

The Idaho House of Representatives passed House Bill 752 on Monday, a measure that would make it a crime for a person to use a bathroom other than the one designated for their ā€œbiological sex.ā€

The story was first reported by the Idaho Capitol Sun after the bill cleared the House.

House Bill 752 would make it a criminal offense — either a misdemeanor or a felony, depending on the number of prior offenses — for individuals who ā€œknowingly and willfullyā€ enter a bathroom or changing room designated for the opposite sex.

The bill would apply to public buildings, including government-owned spaces, and places of ā€œpublic accommodation,ā€ a category that includes private businesses.

According to the bill’s text, it would ā€œprohibit a person from entering a restroom or changing room designated for the opposite sex; provide a penalty; provide exceptions; define terms; and declare an emergency and provide an effective date.ā€

A first offense would be a misdemeanor, punishable by up to one year in prison. A second or subsequent offense within five years would be a felony, punishable by up to five years in prison.

The bill passed in a 54–15 vote on Monday. Six Republicans broke with their party’s majority to join nine Democrats in opposing the measure.

The bill’s sponsor, state Rep. Cornel Rasor, a Republican from Sagle near the Washington-Idaho border, told House lawmakers that the legislation is intended to protect women and girls.

ā€œIt prevents discomfort and voyeurism escalation and assaults, while preserving single-user options and narrow exceptions so no one is denied access for emergency aid,ā€ Rasor said.

State Rep. Chris Mathias, a Democrat from Boise, disagreed, arguing that the legislation would unfairly target transgender Idahoans.

ā€œThe truth of the matter is — and I know a lot of people don’t want to say it — but forcing people who don’t look like the sex they were assigned at birth, or transgender folks, to use other people’s bathrooms is going to put a lot of people in danger,ā€ Mathias said.

The Idaho American Civil Liberties Union made a statement about the bill following its passage.

ā€œIdaho lawmakers continue pushing these harmful, invasive bathroom laws, yet cannot present credible evidence that transgender people using gender-aligned bathrooms threaten public safety,” the Idaho ACLU said. “The bill does nothing to address real criminal acts, such as sexual assault or voyeurism, and disregards concerns from law enforcement about the burden enforcement would place on local resources.”

In addition to human rights advocates, who have spoken out against similar bills advancing in state legislatures across the country, Idaho law enforcement groups have also opposed the measure. They argue that the way the legislation is written would ā€œpose significant practical enforcement challenges,ā€ noting that officers are tasked with maintaining public safety — not conducting gender checks or policing bathroom access.

During a committee hearing last week, law enforcement representatives and several trans Idahoans testified that the bill would make many residents less safe.

ā€œOfficers responding to a complaint would be placed in the difficult position of determining an individual’s biological sex in order to enforce the statute,ā€ Idaho Fraternal Order of Police President Bryan Lovell wrote. ā€œIn many circumstances, there is no clear or reasonable way for officers to make that determination without engaging in questioning or investigative actions that could be viewed as invasive and inappropriate.ā€

The Idaho Sheriffs’ Association requested that lawmakers amend the bill to require that individuals be given an opportunity to leave a bathroom immediately before facing potential prosecution.

The bill now heads to the Idaho Senate for consideration. To become law, it must pass both chambers and avoid a veto from the governor.

A separate bathroom bill, House Bill 607, which would be enforced through civil lawsuits, passed the House last month but has not yet received a committee hearing in the Senate.

Continue Reading

State Department

Report: US to withhold HIV aid to Zambia unless mineral access expanded

New York Times obtained Secretary of State Marco Rubio memo

Published

on

(Image by rusak/Bigstock)

The State Department is reportedly considering withholding assistance for Zambians with HIV unless the country’s government allows the U.S. to access more of its minerals.

The New York Times on Monday reported Secretary of State Marco Rubio in a memo to State Department’s Bureau of African Affairs staffers wrote the U.S. ā€œwill only secure our priorities by demonstrating willingness to publicly take support away from Zambia on a massive scale.ā€ The newspaper said it obtained a copy of the letter.

Zambia is a country in southern Africa that borders Tanzania, Malawi, Mozambique, Zimbabwe, Botswana, Namibia, Angola, and the Democratic Republic of Congo.

The Times notes upwards of 1.3 million Zambians receive daily HIV medications through PEPFAR. The newspaper reported Rubio in his memo said the Trump-Vance administration could ā€œsignificantly cut assistanceā€ as soon as May.

ā€œReports of (the) State Department withholding lifesaving HIV treatment in return for mining concessions in Zambia does not make us safer, stronger, or more prosperous,ā€ said U.S. Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), the ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, on Tuesday. ā€œMonetizing innocent people’s lives further undermines U.S. global leadership and is just plain wrong.ā€

The Washington Blade has reached out to the State Department for comment.

Zambia received breakthrough HIV prevention drug through PEPFAR

Rubio on Jan. 28, 2025, issued a waiver that allowed PEPFAR and other ā€œlife-saving humanitarian assistanceā€ programs to continue to operate during a freeze on nearly all U.S. foreign aid spending. HIV/AIDS service providers around the world with whom the Blade has spoken say PEPFAR cuts and the loss of funding from the U.S. Agency for International Development, which officially closed on July 1, 2025, has severely impacted their work.

The State Department last September announced PEPFAR will distribute lenacapavir in countries with high prevalence rates. Zambia two months later received the first doses of the breakthrough HIV prevention drug.

Kenya and Uganda are among the African countries have signed health agreements with the U.S. since the Trump-Vance administration took office.

The Times notes the countries that signed these agreements pledged to increase health spending. The Blade last month reported LGBTQ rights groups have questioned whether these agreements will lead to further exclusion and government-sanctioned discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity.

Continue Reading

National

‘They took him!’ Gay married couple torn apart by ICE

As Allan Marrero remains in ICE custody, his husband Matt continues to fight tirelessly for his release.

Published

on

Allan Marrero and Matthew Marrero (Photo courtesy of the couple)

For 113 days, Allan Marrero has been in U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) custody, while his husband, Matthew Marrero, has been using every available avenue to secure his release.

Since Nov. 24, 2025, Allan—originally from the Cayman Islands—has been held at multiple detention facilities across the United States. His detention began after what was meant to be a routine, good-faith marriage-based green card interview at Federal Plaza in New York City, marking two years of marriage with Matthew.

Advocates, including Rev. Amanda Hambrick Ashcraft, Rev. Dr. Jacqui Lewis, and attorney Alexandra Rizio, have been actively involved in supporting the couple and navigating the legal challenges posed by ICE and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). The case highlights the Trump-Vance administration’s aggressive use of immigration enforcement to detain and deport individuals, even in circumstances where applicants have established legal claims to remain in the U.S.

Timeline of Allan’s detainment

On Nov. 24, Allan and his husband Matt arrived at 26 Federal Plaza in New York City for what was supposed to be a routine, marriage-based green card interview. They were accompanied by Rev. Amanda Hambrick Ashcraft, a minister from Middle Church in Manhattan, where the couple attended and Matthew sang in the choir.

They arrived early for their 8 a.m. appointment, prepared and hopeful. Despite growing news coverage about increased immigration enforcement under President Donald Trump, they believed in the process and felt confident they had done everything right.

ā€œThey brought with them a three-inch binder documenting their entire life together—photos, letters, legal records, and other evidence,ā€ Ashcraft said.

ā€œFrom the moment you get to Federal Plaza, the process is extremely traumatic—and that’s by design,ā€ she explained. ā€œThere’s nothing warm or intuitive about it. It’s dehumanizing, and parts of it feel barbaric.ā€

Immediately after meeting the USCIS officer, something felt off.

ā€œWe came with a three-inch binder of our entire life—photos, letters, everything,ā€ Matt said. ā€œWe were dressed up, ready, confident we had done everything right. The first thing she said was, ā€˜I don’t want that. Take it all apart.’ That was the moment I knew something wasn’t right.ā€

The officer then asked the couple for their passports—something neither of them had on hand. That seemed to be strike two, signaling that, just as with previous steps in this process, the interview was already off course because of the woman behind the desk.

As the couple was told to move to a new room for their interview, Ashcraft was denied entry with them. This struck all three as odd; Ashcraft had attended immigration and green card interviews before to provide spiritual guidance and bolster claims of legitimacy, with no issues. Coupled with the initial hostility over the binder, it was a clear sign that the day would not go as hoped.

ā€œThere’s no real policy—it’s whoever is in front of you deciding what the rules are at that moment,ā€ Ashcraft added. ā€œWhatever they say goes. That’s what makes it so dangerous.ā€

Inside the tightly controlled interview, tensions escalated.

ā€œI looked over at my husband when she asked how we met—just instinct. He’s the love of my life,ā€ Matt said. ā€œShe snapped her fingers in my face and said, ā€˜Don’t look at him.’ We’re telling our love story, and I’m not even allowed to look at my husband.ā€

The officer then raised questions about a missed immigration hearing for Allan in 2022.Ā 

Allan had lived in the United States since 2013 and had been diligent about maintaining his legal status and personal growth. During that time, he had entered a rehabilitation program for alcohol addiction—a commitment that, coincidentally, caused him to miss the scheduled court hearing. Medical records explained by Alexandra Rizio, Allan’s attorney, corroborate this.

Because the judge did not know Allan was in rehab, a removal order was issued in his absence.

ā€œHe didn’t realize that he had a removal order in his name,ā€ Rizio, the Make the Road New York attorney, explained. ā€œWhen you have a removal order, it means ICE can pick you up at any moment. He walked into that interview completely unaware that he was at risk of being arrested on the spot.ā€

Allan Marrero and Matthew Marrero (Photo courtesy of the couple)

The officer acknowledged that their marriage was legitimate but denied Allan’s green card application. She told them they would need to appear before an immigration judge, signaling that his journey to legal status was far from over and still subject to the whims of others.

ā€œShe told us, ā€˜Out of the goodness of my heart, I’ll let you leave today. I could have called ICE, but I won’t,ā€™ā€ Matt recalled. ā€œMy husband started crying, I was a wreck.ā€

Despite that comment, the couple was escorted through a series of back hallways. Allan’s file was handed off to ICE officers, and the supervisor walked away.

ā€œThey walked us down this long hallway, took his file, handed it to ICE agents, and just left. No explanation, no warning. Suddenly they’re telling him to put his hands behind his back, and I’m standing there asking, ā€˜What is happening?ā€™ā€

The gravity of the situation escalated.

ā€œHe was crying, I was crying, we were hugging, and I kept saying, ā€˜It’s going to be okay,ā€™ā€ Matt said. ā€œAnd then they just pulled him away into an elevator and left me there. It happened so fast it didn’t even feel real.ā€

A supervisor entered briefly to distinguish between what could be controlled inside the office and what could not be controlled outside. Rizio called this a deliberate choice to intensify the emotional pressure.

ā€œWhat the officer could have done was say, ā€˜You have a removal order—go hire a lawyer,ā€™ā€ Rizio said. ā€œThat would have been the humane and reasonable response. Instead, ICE was called, and they arrested him.ā€

Outside the room, Ashcraft heard the chaos unfold.

ā€œThe next thing I heard was Matthew screaming down the hallway: ā€˜Amanda! Amanda! They took him!ā€™ā€ she recounted. ā€œThat’s how it happened—just like that, after everything they had prepared.ā€

For the next 36 hours, Matt had no information about his husband’s whereabouts.

ā€œFor 36 hours, I had no idea where my husband was,ā€ he said. ā€œNo phone call, no information, nothing. It felt like he had just disappeared.ā€

The following morning, Matt’s mother and sister drove down from Connecticut to help. They returned to Federal Plaza with Allan’s anxiety medication and contact information, only to be told minutes later that Allan was no longer there. The couple could not locate him through the ICE online system. Only after contacting an attorney did they learn he had been transferred to Delaney Hall, a detention facility in New Jersey.

Matt and Allan’s mother drove to Delaney Hall in Newark, an industrial area where families—including children—waited in the rain. Inside, staff initially insisted Allan was not present, despite documentation proving otherwise. After long delays, they were finally allowed to see him.

This was the first time Matt felt the point-blank homophobia of the detention system.

ā€œWhen I finally saw him, they told us we couldn’t touch,ā€ Matt said. ā€œI’m watching straight couples kiss and hold each other, but I can’t even hold my husband’s hand.ā€

ā€œYou ripped my husband away, didn’t tell me where he was for 36 hours, and now I’m not allowed to console him?ā€ he added. ā€œIt was so cold—it felt completely inhuman.ā€

Conditions inside detention quickly became grueling.

ā€œHe was moved in the middle of the night, chained at his wrists and ankles, not told where he was going,ā€ Matt said. ā€œThey kept the cuffs on for days—he had cuts and bruises.ā€

ā€œThe worst part isn’t even the facilities—it’s the transport,ā€ Matt continued. ā€œYou’re chained like an animal, trying to eat a bologna sandwich and drink water while shackled. You can barely move your body.ā€

Allan remained at Delaney Hall for approximately two weeks. One night, he told Matt that groups of detainees were being taken out in the middle of the night without warning. Shortly afterward, he was among them.

Around 12:30 a.m., Allan called to say he was being moved. He and others were gathered in a visitation room and held for hours without food or beds. By midday, they were shackled again, loaded onto transport, and flown out of state. His location once again disappeared from the ICE tracking system.

Over the next several days, Allan was moved through multiple locations, including a holding area near an airport in Phoenix, where detainees were kept in overcrowded, tent-like enclosures without seating. He remained in restraints for extended periods and was denied access to his medication.

From there, he was transferred through facilities in Texas and Louisiana before ultimately being sent to a remote detention site in the Florida Everglades, informally known as ā€œAlligator Alcatraz.ā€

Conditions there were severe. Detainees were held in cages with dozens of men in each enclosure. Sanitation was poor, with overflowing toilets near sleeping areas. Exposure to the elements and limited access to medical care caused Allan’s health to deteriorate. Phone calls were limited to short, scheduled windows.

ā€œHe told me about being in a cage in the Everglades—30 men, toilets overflowing next to where they sleep,ā€ Matt said. ā€œThere were signs about poisonous snakes, and he said, ā€˜If one shows up, I’m going to die—there’s nobody here.ā€™ā€

ā€œICE officers would tell them, ā€˜You’re a burden to your family. Just sign your self-deportation papers,ā€™ā€ Matt added. ā€œHe would call me crying, saying, ā€˜Just let me go, forget about me.’ That’s psychological warfare.ā€

Ashcraft reflected on the system’s cruelty.

ā€œAt every step, it feels designed to be as insular, as cruel, and as impenetrable as possible,ā€ she said. ā€œAt every turn, we’re seeing a new kind of cruelty…Someone will say, ā€˜They can’t do that,’ and we have to say, ā€˜Actually, they are.ā€™ā€

Eventually, Allan was transferred to a detention facility in Natchez, Miss., where conditions were more stable and he was finally able to receive his prescribed medications. Around this time, his legal case began to shift.

His attorney submitted documentation showing that the missed 2022 hearing had occurred while he was in a verified rehabilitation program. The same immigration judge who had issued the original removal order agreed to reopen the case and rescinded that order, restoring Allan’s standing.

ā€œThe judge agreed with us and granted bond. At that point, we thought he would be released and we could move forward. That’s how the system is supposed to work,ā€ Rizio said.

In early February, a bond hearing was scheduled. Matt traveled to Mississippi in anticipation of Allan’s release. The legal team presented extensive documentation, including letters of support from members of Congress, as well as evidence of Allan’s marriage and community ties.

Instead of releasing him, ICE exercised its authority to place a 10-day hold while considering an appeal. During that time, Matt remained in Mississippi, visiting Allan regularly.

ā€œICE decided to just ignore that and not release him. They used something called the ā€˜auto stay’ provision to keep him locked up anyway,ā€ Rizio said. ā€œIt’s essentially them saying, ā€˜We don’t like the judge’s order, so we’re not going to follow it….That feels crazy—because it is crazy. There’s no real statutory basis for it. It’s a regulation that allows them to operate outside the bounds of what the law actually says.ā€

Before the hold period ended, a second immigration judge became involved. Without reviewing the full evidence or receiving a newly filed green card application, the judge issued a decision in advance.

ā€œA completely different judge—who isn’t even an immigration specialist—stepped in and denied an application that wasn’t even before him,ā€ Rizio explained. ā€œI have never seen anything like that in 14 years of practice.ā€

She has argued that the decision was procedurally improper and legally flawed.

ā€œHe decided, based on rehab records showing recovery and sobriety, to label Allan a ā€˜habitual drunkard.’ He cherry-picked information and ignored the evidence that he had successfully completed treatment.ā€

When the 10-day hold expired, Allan’s legal team attempted to secure his release again, but ICE cited the new ruling to continue detaining him. By that point, Allan had been in detention for more than 100 days.

ā€œHe could have walked out of detention with a green card,ā€ Rizio said. ā€œInstead, he’s still sitting in detention because of actions that simply shouldn’t have happened.ā€

ā€œNone of what I just described reflects a system that cares about justice,ā€ she said. ā€œIt feels like punishment. I feel very confident these actions are designed to make people give up… Allan has already lost over three months of his life. He’s never going to get that time back.ā€

ā€œWe did everything right,ā€ Matt said. ā€œWe followed the law, built a life, got married, had a clear pathway to citizenship. And now my whole life is on pause. If someone wants to understand this, imagine someone coming in and kidnapping the person you love most—taking away all your control. That’s what this feels like.ā€

Allan remains in detention in Natchez while legal challenges move forward. Throughout his time in custody, detainees have reported being pressured to accept voluntary deportation, often being told they are burdens to their families. Despite the mounting legal and emotional toll, Allan continues to fight his case from inside detention, while his family and community advocate for his release on the outside.

The couple has set up a Go-Fund-Me to help with the financial costs of this ongoing situation.

The Blade contacted ICE and DHS for comment but did not receive a response.

Matthew Marrero and Allan Marrero (Photo courtesy of the couple)
Continue Reading

Popular