National
Gay couples discussed in Senate immigration hearing
Napolitano says no greater risk of fraud upon UAFA passage

Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano said UAFA would not present a greater risk of fraud. (Washington Blade file photo by Michael Key)
Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano said on Wednesday that protections for bi-national same-sex couples would result in no greater risk of fraud under U.S. immigration code.
During a hearing on comprehensive immigration reform before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Napolitano made the case for comprehensive immigration reform and answered questions about legislation that would enable gay Americans to sponsor a same-sex foreign partner for residency in the United States.
These couples face separation — and possibly deportation of the foreign national in the relationship — under current law. President Obama has called for a provision addressing this issue as part of his plan for comprehensive immigration reform.
Senate Judiciary Committee Chair Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) asked whether the Uniting American Families Act — legislation addressing the issue that he introduced on the same day in the Senate — would present a risk of people abusing the system to gain entry to the country.
In response, Napolitano denied any problems with respect to fraud would present themselves upon passage of Leahy’s legislation.
“Our adjudicators are experienced at fraud, fraud detection,” Napolitano said. “We’ve actually increased the number of examiners who focus on this. This is done primarily at [U.S. Citizenship & Immigration Services]. But, no, we don’t see that as a barrier to achieving equality.”
In his opening statement before the hearing, Leahy — saying he wants the committee to complete work on immigration reform legislation “over the next few months” — announced he had introduced the legislation with bipartisan support along with Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine), who became the first Republican to co-sponsor the legislation in September.
“This legislation will end the needless discrimination so many Americans face in our immigration system,” Leahy said. “Too many citizens, including Vermonters who I have come to know personally and who want nothing more than to be with their loved ones, are denied this basic human right. This policy serves no legitimate purpose and it is wrong.”
UAFA imposes the same restrictions and penalties applied to straight Americans seeking to sponsor a spouse for residency via a marriage-based green card application under the Immigration & Naturalization Act. The penalties for fraud include a maximum of five years in prison and a $250,000 fine.
Shin Inouye, a White House spokesperson, said in response to a query over whether Obama has decided to endorse UAFA that the legislation is in line with Obama’s plan for immigration reform, which includes a provision for bi-national same-sex couples.
“The president has long believed that Americans with same-sex partners from other countries should not be faced with the painful choice between staying with the person they love or staying in the country they love,” Inouye said. “There is already legislation that has been introduced in Congress that would address that, and the president’s proposal tracks that legislation.”
The 12-page testimony that Napolitano submitted to the committee reiterates Obama’s support for bi-national same-sex couples as part of reform, saying his plan “treats the families of same-sex partners the same as other families by giving foreign born same-sex partners of Americans access to the family based immigration system.”
Sen. Chris Coons (D-Del.) — lamenting that the issue is often seen as a “divisive issue or side issue that doesn’t deserve focus” — followed up later with questions about whether the Obama administration could commit to ceasing the deportation of foreign-nationals in same-sex relationships under current law if nothing is done. Napolitano denied she was able to take such action under the Defense of Marriage Act.
“I cannot give a categorical answer there because of DOMA, and we are charged with enforcing DOMA as well,” Napolitano replied.
LGBT advocates — including Immigration Equality — have been pushing the Obama administration to place on hold the marriage-based green card applications of bi-national same-sex couples until DOMA is stricken from the books. Upon each request, the administration has said it must uphold DOMA.
Under Napolitano, the administration has already taken steps to assist bi-national couples. In October, the Department of Homeland Security issued guidance stipulating immigration officers should consider “long-term, same-sex partners” as families when considering whether to exercise prosecutorial discretion in the potential deportation of an undocumented immigrant.
Also presenting testimony during a second panel at the hearing was Jose Antonio Vargas, a gay Filipino undocumented immigrant and award-winning journalist.
While his testimony reflected more on the importance of incorporating language as part of reform along the lines of the DREAM Act to allow young, undocumented immigrants like himself a path to citizenship, Vargas talked about being both gay and an undocumented immigrant as reasons why he’s faced challenges in the country.
Under questioning from Sen. Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), Vargas said he’s spoken with bi-national same-sex couples and realized the destructiveness of current immigration law.
“It’s been really interesting when you see same-sex couples say I can’t marry and petition of 5, 10, 12 years because we have DOMA, the Defense of Marriage Act,” Vargas said. “The federal government doesn’t acknowledge same-sex marriage even if it happens in New York, for example, or Massachusetts. You really see how broken it is from the perspective of individual lives and their connections to their own communities, and that’s why it was important for me not just to bring my Filipino-American family, but to bring the family that I found at my high school.”
National
Advocacy groups issue US travel advisory ahead of World Cup
Renee Good’s death in Minneapolis among incidents cited
More than 100 organizations have issued a travel advisory for the U.S. ahead of the 2026 World Cup.
The World Cup will take place in the U.S., Canada, and Mexico from June 11-July 19.
“In light of the deteriorating human rights situation in the United States and in the absence of meaningful action and concrete guarantees from FIFA, host cities, or the U.S. government, the undersigned organizations are issuing this travel advisory for fans, players, journalists, and other visitors traveling to and within the United States for the June 2026 FIFA Men’s World Cup. World Cup games will be played in 11 different cities across the United States, which, like many localities, have already been the target of the Trump administration’s violent and abusive immigration crackdown,” reads the advisory that the Council for Global Equality and other groups that include the American Civil Liberties Union issued on April 23. “The impacts of these policies vary by locality.”
“While the Trump administration’s rising authoritarianism and increasing violence pose serious risks to all, those from immigrant communities, racial and ethnic minority groups, and LGBTQ+ individuals have been and continue to be disproportionately targeted and affected by the administration’s policies and, as such, are most vulnerable to serious harm when traveling to and/or within the United States,” it adds. “This travel advisory calls on fans, players, journalists, and other visitors to exercise caution.”
The advisory specifically mentions Renee Good.
A U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent on Jan. 7 shot and killed her in Minneapolis. Good, 37, left behind her wife and three children.
The full advisory can be read here.
State Department
Democracy Forward files FOIA request for State Department bathroom policy records
April 20 memo outlined anti-transgender rule
Democracy Forward on Tuesday filed a Freedom of Information Act request for records on the State Department’s new bathroom policy.
A memo titled “Updates Regarding Biological Sex and Intimate Spaces, Including Restrooms” that the State Department issued on April 20 notes employees can no longer use bathrooms that correspond with their gender identity.
“The administration affirms that there are two sexes — male and female — and that federal facilities should operate on this objective and longstanding basis to ensure consistency, privacy, and safety in shared spaces,” State Department spokesperson Tommy Piggot told the Daily Signal, a conservative news website that first reported on the memo. “In line with President Trump’s executive order this provides clear, uniform guidance to the department by grounding policy in biological sex as determined at birth.”
President Donald Trump shortly after he took office in January 2025 issued an executive order that directed the federal government to only recognize two genders: male and female. The sweeping directive also ordered federal government agencies to “effectuate this policy by taking appropriate action to ensure that intimate spaces designated for women, girls, or females (or for men, boys, or males) are designated by sex and not identity.”
Democracy Forward’s FOIA request that the Washington Blade exclusively obtained on Tuesday is specifically seeking a copy of the memo that details the State Department’s new bathroom policy. Democracy Forward has also requested “all” memo-specific communications between the State Department’s Bureau of Global Public Affairs and the Daily Signal from April 1-21.
Federal Government
House Republicans push nationwide ‘Don’t Say Gay’ bill
Measures would restrict federal funding for LGBTQ-affirming schools
Republicans have been gaining ground in reshaping education policy to be less inclusive toward LGBTQ students at the state level, and now they are turning their focus to Capitol Hill.
Some GOP lawmakers are pushing for a nationwide “Don’t Say Gay” bill, doubling down on their commitment to being the party of “traditional family values” by excluding anyone who does not identify with their sex at birth.
The largest anti-LGBTQ education legislation to reach the House chamber is House Bill 2616 — the Parental Rights Over the Education and Care of Their Kids Act, or the PROTECT Kids Act. The PROTECT Kids Act, proposed by U.S. Rep. Tim Walberg (R-Mich.), and co-sponsored by U.S. Reps. Burgess Owens (R-Utah), Mary Miller (R-Ill.), Robert Onder (R-Mo.), and Kevin Kiley (R-Calif.), would require any public elementary and middle schools that receive federal funding to require parental consent to change a child’s gender expression in school.
The bill, which was discussed during Tuesday’s House Rules Committee hearing, would specifically require any schools that get federal money from the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 — which was created to minimize financial discrepancies in education for low-income students — to get parental approval before identifying any child’s gender identity as anything other than what was provided to the school initially. This includes getting approval before allowing children to use their preferred locker room or bathroom.
It reads that any school receiving this funding “shall obtain parental consent before changing a covered student’s (1) gender markers, pronouns, or preferred name on any school form; or (2) sex-based accommodations, including locker rooms or bathrooms.”
LGBTQ rights advocates have criticized both national and state efforts to require parental permission to use a child’s preferred gender identity, as it raises issues of at-home safety — especially if the home is not LGBTQ-affirming — and could lead to the outing of transgender or gender-curious students.
A follow-up bill, HB 2617, proposed by Owens, one of the bill’s co-sponsors, prevents the use of federal funding to “advance concepts related to gender ideology,” using the definition from President Donald Trump’s 2025 Executive Order 14168, making that an enshrined definition in law of sex rather than just by executive order. There is also a bill making its way through the senate with the same text— Senate Bill 2251.
Advocates have also criticized this follow-up legislation, as it would restrict school staff — including teachers and counselors — from acknowledging trans students’ identities or providing any support. They have said that this kind of isolation can worsen mental health outcomes for LGBTQ youth and allows for education to be politicized rather than being based in reality.
David Stacy, the Human Rights Campaign’s vice president of government affairs, called this legislation out for using LGBTQ children as political pawns in an ideology fight — one that could greatly harm the safety of these children if passed.
“Trans kids are not a political agenda — they are students who deserve safety and affirmation at school like anyone else,” Stacy said in a statement. “Despite the many pressing issues facing our nation, House Republicans continue their bizarre obsession with trans people. H.R. 2616 does not protect children. It targets them. This bill is cruel, and we’re prepared to fight it.”
This is similar to Florida House Bills 1557 and 1069, referred to as the “Don’t Say Gay” bill and “Don’t Say They” bill, respectively, restricting classroom discussions on sexual orientation and gender identity, prohibiting the use of pronouns consistent with one’s gender identity, expanding book banning procedures, and censoring health curriculum.
The American Civil Liberties Union is tracking 233 bills related to restricting student and educator rights in the U.S.
-
National4 days agoBREAKING NEWS: Shots fired at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner
-
Movies5 days agoAn acting legend meets his match in ‘The Christophers’
-
Theater4 days agoWorld premiere of ‘Everything, Devoured’ oozes queer energy
-
The White House3 days agoFrom red carpet to chaos: A first-person narrative of the WHCD shooting
