National
GOProud comes out for marriage equality
Group adopts resolution as it prepares for state and local work


GOProud Executive Director Jimmy LaSalvia says he group favors civil marriage for gay couples (Washington Blade file photo by Michael Key)
The gay conservative group GOProud announced on Friday that has come out in favor civil marriage rights for gay couples — inspiring mixed reaction among other LGBT advocates — as the organization pledges to undertake greater engagement in state and local affairs.
In an organizational statement, GOProud announced it adopted during a board meeting on Jan. 12 a resolution that lays out the group’s position on relationship recognition for same-sex marriage. Among the nuances of the position is continued concern over the legalization of marriage equality by judicial fiat.
“GOProud believes that stable, loving, committed relationships are the cornerstone of our society and should be protected and encouraged for all couples — including gay and lesbian couples,” the resolution states. “We believe that the decision about how to best do this is one that should be made at the state level and that these decisions are best made by the people directly or through their elected representatives — not by unelected judges.”
The organization insists that it’s taking a federalist approach to the issue — supporting civil marriage where possible and domestic partnerships where possible — but doesn’t believe in a “one-size-fits-all approach” for relationship recognition for gay couples.
GOProud further says it understands religious objections to same-sex marriage and doesn’t believe in requiring religious institutions to honor or consecrate a same-sex marriage.
“We are firmly committed to winning hearts and minds, which is why we understand that not everyone who doesn’t support marriage for gay couples is automatically a bigot or homophobe,” the resolution states. “We understand that there are people of deep faith who may have religious objections to marriage. We respect those differences and believe that no church or religious institution should ever be forced to solemnize a marriage that is against its teachings.”
Jimmy LaSalvia, executive director of GOProud, later clarified for the Washington Blade that the resolution means “we support civil marriage for gay couples” when asked whether the resolution was an endorsement of marriage equality. LaSalvia also said the resolution was adopted unanimously.
The organization hasn’t opposed marriage equality before, although it has often minimized its importance in comparison to conservative principles. Additionally, the group has expressed opposition to the Defense of Marriage Act on the basis that it violates states rights under the Tenth Amendment.
Asked whether concerns about judicial rulings in favor of same-sex marriage mean the organization is opposed to the lawsuits challenging DOMA and California’s Proposition 8 at the Supreme Court, LaSalvia emphasized that GOProud believes the “best” way to achieve marriage equality is through the people or elected representatives — but doesn’t outright oppose judicial rulings on the matter.
The news follows an announcement earlier in the week that GOProud would undertake greater efforts in affairs involving state and local governments as states like Rhode Island, Delaware and Illinois are set to take up marriage legislation. But LaSalvia said those plans aren’t yet fully developed.
“We will be forming state and local affiliates,” LaSalvia said. “Our engagement on these issues will obviously vary from state to state and depend on the circumstances.”
Other LGBT organizations had mixed reactions to GOProud’s new position on marriage — with many expressing support and one gay Democratic group expressing consternation. GOProud has often been derided by other LGBT advocates because of its support for conservative policy — including support for conservative political leaders — and for endorsing Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney in the 2012 election.
Gregory Angelo, interim executive director of the Log Cabin Republicans, expressed satisfaction even though the two gay conservative groups sometimes come into conflict.
“Log Cabin Republicans welcomes GOProud to the ongoing effort to change the minds of conservatives and Republicans on the issue of marriage equality,” Angelo said “We’re thrilled they’ve added their voices to the growing chorus of Republicans and conservatives who support the rights of loving couples to build a life together through marriage.”
Evan Wolfson, president of Freedom to Marry, was happy GOProud is adding its voice to the marriage equality effort, saying the group may be able to reach others who don’t normally listen to LGBT advocates.
“It is good to see GOProud explicitly supporting the freedom to marry,” Wolfson said. “America is one country, and precious constitutional freedoms such as the freedom to marry, should be respected fully no matter what state families are living, working, or traveling in. Judges (including Justices of the Supreme Court), members of Congress, the president, state lawmakers and governors, and each of us in conversation with the reachable but not reached, all have important roles to play in ending the denial of marriage and ensuring that loving and committed couples share in the freedom to marry — with the same rules, same responsibilities, and same respect under the law — nationwide.”
But Jerame Davis, the volunteer executive director of the now dormant National Stonewall Democrats, said the new position reflects GOProud’s willingness to say anything to receive media attention.
“This is just more proof that GOProud is nothing more than a performance troupe of gay conservatives who want to play at politics, but have nothing serious to offer to the discussion,” Davis said. “Just three short months ago, they were lavishing praise on Mitt Romney and claiming marriage equality was just a distraction by liberals looking for votes. Now that they don’t need to suck up to an anti-equality bigot, they’ve seen that the only way they can keep getting attention is to change positions.”
The Human Rights Campaign, the nation’s largest LGBT organization, declined to comment on the GOProud statement.
The complete resolution follows:
GOPROUD ON MARRIAGE AND RELATIONSHIP RECOGNITION
Since our founding, GOProud has worked exclusively on federal issues. Because marriage has been a state issue since the founding of our country, we have had no official position on marriage or relationship recognition. We have supported, and continue to support, the repeal of DOMA, and we oppose any effort to federalize marriage though a constitutional amendment.
Now that GOProud’s Board of Directors has voted to begin work on the state and local level, we believe it is important to lay out our principles when it comes to marriage and relationship recognition.
GOProud believes that stable, loving, committed relationships are the cornerstone of our society and should be protected and encouraged for all couples – including gay and lesbian couples. We believe that the decision about how to best do this is one that should be made at the state level and that these decisions are best made by the people directly or through their elected representatives – not by unelected judges.
Where civil marriage is possible, we support civil marriage. Where civil unions are possible, we support civil unions. Where domestic partner benefits are possible, we support domestic partner benefits. As federalists, we do not believe in a one-size-fits-all approach on almost any issue and that includes relationship recognition for gay couples.
We are firmly committed to winning hearts and minds, which is why we understand that not everyone who doesn’t support marriage for gay couples is automatically a bigot or homophobe. We understand that there are people of deep faith who may have religious objections to marriage. We respect those differences and believe that no church or religious institution should ever be force to solemnize a marriage that is against its teachings.
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.
New York
Two teens shot steps from Stonewall Inn after NYC Pride parade
One of the victims remains in critical condition

On Sunday night, following the annual NYC Pride March, two girls were shot in Sheridan Square, feet away from the historic Stonewall Inn.
According to an NYPD report, the two girls, aged 16 and 17, were shot around 10:15 p.m. as Pride festivities began to wind down. The 16-year-old was struck in the head and, according to police sources, is said to be in critical condition, while the 17-year-old was said to be in stable condition.
The Washington Blade confirmed with the NYPD the details from the police reports and learned no arrests had been made as of noon Monday.
The shooting took place in the Greenwich Village neighborhood of Manhattan, mere feet away from the most famous gay bar in the city — if not the world — the Stonewall Inn. Earlier that day, hundreds of thousands of people marched down Christopher Street to celebrate 55 years of LGBTQ people standing up for their rights.
In June 1969, after police raided the Stonewall Inn, members of the LGBTQ community pushed back, sparking what became known as the Stonewall riots. Over the course of two days, LGBTQ New Yorkers protested the discriminatory policing of queer spaces across the city and mobilized to speak out — and throw bottles if need be — at officers attempting to suppress their existence.
The following year, LGBTQ people returned to the Stonewall Inn and marched through the same streets where queer New Yorkers had been arrested, marking the first “Gay Pride March” in history and declaring that LGBTQ people were not going anywhere.
New York State Assemblywoman Deborah Glick, whose district includes Greenwich Village, took to social media to comment on the shooting.
“After decades of peaceful Pride celebrations — this year gun fire and two people shot near the Stonewall Inn is a reminder that gun violence is everywhere,” the lesbian lawmaker said on X. “Guns are a problem despite the NRA BS.”