National
A new era begins for HRC under Chad Griffin
Immediate challenges include ballot measures, re-electing Obama
Incoming HRC President Chad Griffin (Photo courtesy of AFER)
After seven years leading the Human Rights Campaign, Joe Solmonese steps down next week, bringing change to the nation’s largest LGBT rights organization just five months before a critical presidential election.
On Monday, Chad Griffin will officially take over as president of HRC, which, with an annual budget of $40 million and about 150 full-time employees, is often seen as the political and cultural lead for the LGBT community. Griffin was named HRC’s new leader in March and replaces Solmonese, who has headed the organization since March 2005.
Solmonese saw many historic and positive changes for the LGBT community in his seven years at the helm. Among them are the defeat of the Federal Marriage Amendment during the Bush years, the fight to repeal “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” and, most recently, the first sitting U.S. president coming out in support of same-sex marriage.
Major challenges await Griffin, including the effort to re-elect President Obama, who has already won HRC’s endorsement. Also ahead, fights over marriage on the ballot in Minnesota, Maine, Maryland and Washington State as well as pursuing long-awaited federal employment non-discrimination protections for LGBT people.
Will Griffin take HRC in a new direction or bring a different style of leadership? The organization has often been criticized in the blogosphere for being too timid in taking on the Democratic establishment and not representing the “queer” faction of the LGBT community. Will the new leadership foster a new perception of the organization?
Griffin is best known for his work as board chair of the American Foundation for Equal Rights and its federal lawsuit challenging California’s Proposition 8, but he’s also had an extensive career fighting for progressive causes. According to his bio on AFER’s website, Griffin is founding partner of political and communications strategy firm Griffin-Schake, and taken on the tobacco and oil industries while advocating for issues such as clean energy, universal health care, stem cell research and early childhood education.
Another open question sparking plenty of speculation concerns HRC’s staffing. Will Griffin bring in his own people as he takes the helm? Some staffers — including David Smith, HRC’s vice president of programs — have been working in the LGBT rights movement since the early 1990s. It’s possible other HRC staffers may take Solmonese’s exit as a cue to make their own departure.
Both Solmonese and Griffin were unavailable for interviews for this article. LGBT rights advocates had different takes on their predictions for the leadership style of Griffin compared to Solmonese.
Winnie Stachelberg, vice president of external affairs at the Center for American Progress, called Griffin a “stupendous choice” and a “passionate advocate … for the range of issues that confront our community,” but characterized the new leadership as a continuation of the work seen under Solmonese.
“We’re not pivoting,” Stachelberg said. “It’s not as if we’ve moved from a leadership style of Joe Solmonese and we’re moving to the leadership style of Chad Griffin. What I think is encouraging about the shift from Joe to Chad is just the leadership that both of them have, the respect that both of them have — not only in the LGBT community, but in the progressive community more broadly.”
Michael Petrelis, a gay San Francisco-based blogger who has criticized HRC, was skeptical of any change and remained critical of HRC, calling the organization “an elitist social network known more for opening LGBT checkbooks for Democrats” than being interested in engaging with the larger LGBT community.
Among the goals that Petrelis called on Griffin to pursue at HRC were his plan for regional town halls, transparency over board of directors meetings and decisions, greater engagement with grassroots activists and ordinary LGBT people as well as a “commitment to members of the community who don’t want to get married or join the military.”
“The DNA of HRC is not wired to allow one man to change the institutional culture and I’ve heard nothing from Chad indicating that he wants to reform the organization,” Petrelis said. “All I expect of HRC regardless of who the executive leadership team comprises, is fealty to the Democratic Party and a commitment to keep the community from getting too pushy and uppity in demanding fierce advocacy and lasting change from our friends.”
But Stachelberg, formerly HRC’s political director, disputed the notion that HRC had been reluctant to criticize the Obama administration or Democratic leadership when the need arose.
“They’ve criticized the administration when they’ve seemed the most strategic, and they’ve worked with the administration and the Democratic establishment, as you call it, in lots of key ways,” Stachelberg said. “They don’t always agree with the Democratic leadership in the House and the Senate, and they make that clear. They don’t always agree with how a Democrat in a state operates, and I think they’ve made that clear.”
Steve Elmendorf, a gay Democratic lobbyist, said he hopes HRC will focus on the presidential election and making sure President Obama stays in the White House.
“We have a presidential campaign, with, I think, the clearest difference we’ve ever seen between two candidates,” Elmendorf said. “I think there are obviously other priorities in the House and the Senate and the ballot initiatives, but I think that the community — and I don’t speak for HRC — but I hope that its No. 1 goal between now and Election Day is to make sure that Barack Obama wins.”
In the long term, Elmendorf said the LGBT rights movement must reach out to public officials who’ve been on the fence about LGBT support — especially Republicans.
“I think that a lot of politicians, particularly on the Republican side, are behind where the voters are,” Elmendorf said. “I think Barack Obama and gay marriage was hugely important and symbolic. We have to grow that on the other side, though. We have to get some Republicans to step out and show that it’s OK to be on the correct side on our issues, and you can do that and get re-elected.”
Elmendorf said he’s been a fan of HRC under the leadership of Solmonese and doesn’t think anything is wrong with the organization, but acknowledged that “all organizations need to periodically change leadership and look internally at themselves and see how they can do a better job.”
“The world is changing on our issues and I think every year or two years organizations need to look at how the world is changing and figure out how we can do a better job,” he said.
Griffin has already taken a more aggressive stance in pushing public officials to support marriage equality even before he’s officially assumed his duties. Last month, after Vice President Joe Biden said on NBC’s “Meet the Press” that he’s “absolutely comfortable” with married gay couples having the “same exact rights” as straight couples — which many media outlets reported as support for marriage equality — Solmonese issued a statement saying he’s “encouraged” by Biden’s comments without explicitly calling it an endorsement.
But Griffin went a step further, telling media outlets that without a doubt Biden’s remarks were an endorsement of marriage equality. In an interview with the Washington Post, Griffin said “only in Washington and only in politics could someone parse the words of what the vice president said” and Biden was “very clear and very direct when asked if he was comfortable with gay marriage.”
Obama came out for same-sex marriage days later and Biden’s remarks have since been interpreted as an endorsement of marriage rights for gay couples (prompting Biden reportedly to apologize to the president for stepping out ahead of the president). Following Obama’s endorsement of marriage, Griffin issued another statement through HRC calling on members of Congress to follow the president’s lead.
“The American public has expressed interest in where their elected officials stand on the issue of marriage for gay and lesbian couples,” Griffin said. “The president has had the courage and integrity to speak out for marriage equality. Now is the time for members of Congress to do so too.”
Shortly thereafter, some public officials followed suit, including House Democratic Whip Steny Hoyer (D-Md.), Assistant Minority Leader Jim Clyburn (D-S.C.) and Illinois Gov. Pat Quinn (D).
John Aravosis, editor of AMERICAblog, said Griffin has already demonstrated considerable skill as an activist, but said keeping up his effectiveness will be challenging after he officially assumes his new duties.
“Chad has proven himself an effective activist with proven political smarts,” Aravosis said. “The challenge for Chad will be maintaining his scrappy effectiveness while at the helm of a large organization not always known for being nimble and edgy. I think it can be done, but he’ll have his work cut out for him.”
The White House
Trump tells Fox News he won the ‘gay vote’ — but polls tell a different story
Trump falsely claims LGBTQ support on Fox despite polling showing overwhelming opposition.
President Donald Trump claimed he won the “gay vote” in 2024, despite evidence showing otherwise.
While appearing by phone on Fox News’s panel show “The Five” on Thursday, Trump falsely claimed he performed particularly well among gay voters while discussing the ongoing war in Iran — a conflict he initiated without formal congressional approval.
“Now I think I did very well with the gay vote, OK? I even played the gay national anthem as my walk-off, OK?” Trump said on air.
“And I think it probably helped me. But I did great. No Republican’s ever gotten the gay vote like I did and I’m very proud of it, I think it’s great. Perhaps it’s because I’m from New York City, I don’t know…”
His claim contradicts 2024 polling from NBC News, which found that the GOP presidential ticket captured fewer than 1 in 5 LGBTQ male voters — a figure that may also include bisexual and transgender men. Trump’s support among LGBTQ female voters was even lower, at just 8%.
White LGBTQ voters favored Vice President Kamala Harris over Trump by a margin of 82% to 16%, while LGBTQ voters of color backed Harris by an even wider 91% to 5%.
Trump also used the appearance to criticize “Gays for Palestine,” saying: “Look at ‘Gays for Palestine’… they kill gays, they kill them instantly, they throw them off buildings, and I’m saying, ‘Who are the gays for Palestine?’”
He further pointed to his campaign’s use of the song “Y.M.C.A.” by the Village People — which he has repeatedly described as a “gay national anthem” — noting that it was frequently used as a walk-off song at rallies, as an indication that he and his campaign were supported by the gay community. The track, long associated with camp and hyper-masculine gay imagery, became a staple of Trump campaign events.
The Village People were later booked to perform at Turning Point USA’s inaugural ball celebrating Trump’s second inauguration. Lead singer Victor Willis previously criticized Trump’s use of the song dating back to 2020 and considered legal action to block it, but ultimately said there was “not much he can do about it.” He later acknowledged the renewed exposure was “beneficial” and “good for business,” boosting the song’s popularity and chart performance.
Despite Trump’s claims of strong support from gay voters, polling has consistently shown otherwise — even as several prominent gay men have held roles in or around his orbit, sometimes dubbed the “A-gays.” These include Richard Grenell, former executive director of the Kennedy Center and Special Presidential Envoy for Special Missions; Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent; Under Secretary of State Jacob Helberg; Department of Energy official Charles T. Moran; and longtime supporter Peter Thiel, co-founder and CEO of Palantir.
His efforts to portray himself as aligned with the gay community stand in conflict with policies advanced under his leadership. These include removing LGBTQ-related data from State Department reports, attempting to narrowly redefine gender identity in federal policy, restricting access to gender-affirming health care, and rolling back anti-discrimination protections. His administration also rescinded initiatives focused on LGBTQ health equity, data collection, and nondiscrimination in health care and education — moves advocates say contribute to stigma and worsen mental health outcomes.
Additionally, some HIV programs and community health centers have lost funding from the federal government after supporting initiatives inclusive of transgender people as a direct result of Trump-Vance policies.
National
Anti-trans visa ruling echoes Nazi regime destroying trans documents
Trump administration escalates attacks on queer community
The Lemkin Institute for Genocide Prevention and Human Security earlier this month released its third Red Flag Alert for the United States about the Trump administration’s anti-trans legislation. As the Lemkin Institute shared in the press release, “the Administration has moved from identifying transgender people as as threat to the family and to the nation’s military prowess to claiming that transgender people constitute a cosmic threat to the spiritual health of the nation and the great direct threat to the US national security in the world.”
The news came the same day that the State Department issued a new rule, “Enhancing Vetting and Combatting Fraud in the Immigrant Visa Program.” Under this new guidance, all visa applicants are required to disclose their “biological sex at birth” during all stages of the process, “even if that differs from the sex listed on the applicant’s foreign passport or identifying documentation.”
This rule also orders that applicants to the green card lottery program share their passport information, so in knowingly collecting passport information that the agency knows will not match a person’s biological sex at birth, it’s creating grounds to deny trans peoples’ biases on the basis of “fraud,” Aleksandra Vaca of Transitics explains.
As is written in the new ruling, “the Department is replacing ‘gender’ with ‘sex’ in accordance with E.O. 14168, Defending Women From Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government, which provides that the term ‘sex’ shall refer to an individual’s sex at birth. Only male and female sex options are available for entrants completing the Diversity Visa entry form.”
Along with outright denying the existence of nonbinary, genderqueer and gender expansive people, this policy creates a precedence for trans people to be stripped of their visas and deported because under 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(6)(C)(i), any foreigner found to have obtained or possess a visa “by fraud or willfully misrepresenting a material fact” will have their visa revoked and face deportation.
By requesting information on “biological sex at birth,” the State Department is forcing a mismatch between documents and enabling officials to accuse trans, nonbinary, and gender expansive immigrants of fraud. Thus, trans and nonbinary immigrants can have their visas revoked and can be deported, and information gathered from immigrants during the visa request process can be added to federal databases and used by immigration authorities, including ICE agents.
With the Supreme Court’s decision this past year allowing ICE officers to use racial profiling, Vaca argues that “now, The Trump administration has given ICE the reason it needs. Under this rule, ICE agents now have the enforcement rationale to assert that trans people–especially those belonging to racial minority groups–are more likely than cis people to have ‘misrepresented’ themselves during the visa process, and therefore, are more likely to enter the country ‘unlawfully.’”
This would enable ICE agents to target trans individuals specifically for being trans. If the goal of this were unclear, a day later the Trump administration released its statement for Women’s History Month 2026, writing that “we are keeping men out of women’s sports, enforcing Title IX as it was originally written and ensuring colleges preserve–and, where possible, expand–scholarships and roster opportunities for female athletes. We are restoring public safety and upholding the rule of law in every city so women, children, and families can feel safe and secure.”
And this is not the first time that ICE has targeted and harmed trans and nonbinary immigrants. Last June, Vera reported that ICE is not including trans people in detection in their public reports, and back in 2020, AFSC reported that trans people held in ICE detention faced “dreadful, ugly” conditions.
While it seems like a new development in Trump’s anti-trans escalation, it echoes a deeply upsetting history of denying and destroying transgender people’s documents following members of the Nazi party seizing power in 1933.
In the early 20th century, Weimar, Germany was an epicenter for gender affirming care with Maganus Hirschfeld’s Institute for Sexual Science. One of the first book burnings of the rising Nazi regime destroyed the Institute’s extensive clinical records and library on trans health and history by Nazi students and stormtroopers. In doing so, the Nazis effectively destroyed the world’s first trans health clinic and one of the richest and most comprehensive collective of information about trans healthcare.
Similarly, the Nazi government invalidated or refused to recognize what was called “transvestite passes,” or passing certificates that allowed trans people to avoid arrest under Paragraph 175 which prohibited cross-dressing. During the Weimar Republic — the regime that preceded the Third Reich — recognized and affirmed the identities of trans people (in limited ways) with specific documentation that helped prevent them from arrest. Invalidating and disregarding these passes allowed police and Nazi officials to target trans people and harass, extort and arrest them, and the record of passes themselves helped officials target trans people.
The changes to visa guidelines — alongside Kansas’s move to revoke trans drivers’ licenses last month — is reflective of this escalation of violence against trans people during the Nazi’s rise to power, which scholars like Dr. Laurie Marhoefer is just beginning to uncover. And along with the revocation of identification documents this past week, a recent Fourth Circuit Court ruled that states can deny Medicaid coverage for gender-affirming surgery.
The Fourth Circuit Court decision affirmed the Supreme Court’s decision in Skrmetti, which ruled that bans on gender affirming healthcare for young people are constitutional. This ruling extends this ban to include adult healthcare bans, allowing West Virginia’s exclusion of Medicaid coverage for adult gender affirming healthcare to take full effect. Even more upsetting was what the ruling itself said, calling gender affirming healthcare “dangerous.”
As was written in the Fourth Circuit Opinion, “it’s not irrational for a legislature to encourage citizens ‘to appreciate their sex’ and not ‘become disdainful of their sex’ by refusing to fund experimental procedures that may have the opposite effect.”
In reality, what this ruling and the opinion reflect, is the next step in government regulation and oversight over marginalized peoples’ bodies. From the overturn of Roe v. Wade, which removed federal protection of access to abortion, this next step represents the denial of people’s access to vital, lifesaving care–and to be clear, gender affirming care is not just for trans, nonbinary, and intersex people. It’s a dangerous escalation and one that echoes previous violence against trans people under fascist regimes; the Lemkin Institute is right to raise concern.
Pennsylvania
Pa. House passes bill to codify marriage equality in state law
Governor supports gay state Rep. Malcolm Kenyatta’s measure
The Pennsylvania House of Representatives on Wednesday passed a bill that would codify marriage equality in state law.
House Bill 1800 passed by a 127-72 vote margin. Twenty-six Republicans voted for the measure.
The Republican-controlled Pennsylvania Senate will now consider the bill that state Rep. Malcolm Kenyatta (D-Philadelphia), who is the first openly gay person of color elected to the state’s General Assembly, introduced. Democratic Gov. Josh Shapiro supports the measure.
“Here in Pennsylvania, we believe in your freedom to marry who you love,” said Shapiro on Wednesday. “Today, the House has stepped up to protect that right.”
BREAKING: The Pennsylvania House just passed @RepKenyatta's bill to codify marriage equality into law in PA — and they did it with broad bipartisan support.
— Governor Josh Shapiro (@GovernorShapiro) March 25, 2026
Here in Pennsylvania, we believe in your freedom to marry who you love. Today, the House has stepped up to protect that…
‘Jonah’ an undeniably compelling but unusual memory play
The Oscar-losing performance that’s too good to miss
Trump tells Fox News he won the ‘gay vote’ — but polls tell a different story
Anti-trans visa ruling echoes Nazi regime destroying trans documents
Japanese Supreme Court to consider marriage equality
D.C. goes gaga for Gaga
Menaka Guruswamy celebrated as India’s first openly LGBTQ MP
HRC to host National Rainbow Seder
Gay priest credited with boosting church support for LGBTQ Catholics
