National
Obama signs LGBT-inclusive domestic violence bill
VAWA has non-discrimination rules, provides grants to LGBT programs


President Obama signed into law an LGBT-inclusive reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act (Blade file photo by Michael Key)
Flanked by lawmakers and women’s rights advocates, President Obama on Thursday afternoon signed into law LGBT-inclusive legislation aimed at combating domestic violence and helping its victims.
Obama signed the reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act during a ceremony in the auditorium of the Department of the Interior, concluding the signing by saying, “There you go, everybody!”
The law reauthorizes the 1994 anti-domestic violence measure written by Vice President Biden, which provides funding for the investigation and prosecution of violent crimes crimes against women as well as funding for victims assistance services.
Additionally, the reauthorization institutes new provisions to help more victims of domestic violence, such as those in the LGBT community and individuals in Native American tribes.
In remarks before the signing the bill, Obama emphasized the importance of VAWA reauthorization as a means to continue the protections put in place by the 1994 version of the law while making an oblique reference to the LGBT community.
“Because of this bill, we’ll keep in place all the protections and services that Joe described, and, as he said, we’ll expand them to cover even more women,” Obama said. “Because this is a country where everybody should be able to pursue their own measure of happiness and live their lives free from fear, no matter who you are, no matter who you love.”
At one point as Obama was offering his remarks someone in audience shouted, “We love you, Mr. President!” Obama replied, “I love you back!”
Among those joining Obama on stage was Sharon Stapel, executive director of the New York-based National Coalition of Anti-Violence Programs.
The president thanked her for her work on domestic violence issue as he noted the LGBT protections in the bill.
“Today is about all the Americans who face discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity when they seek help,” Obama said. “So I want to thank Sharon Stapel… for the work she’s doing–the great work she’s doing with the Anti-Violence Project. But Sharon and all the other advocates who are focused on this community, they can’t do it alone. And then now they won’t have to. That’s what today is all about.”
In a statement, Stapel said the VAWA reauthorization includes the LGBT community “in truly historic, unprecedented ways.”
“For the first time in history, federal law includes LGBT anti-discrimination provisions, a huge victory for the LGBT communities and a great step forward for LGBT inclusion in our nation’s laws,” she said. “By including LGBT people in VAWA, we can say to all survivors of violence: you matter and there is support for you.”
Also on stage with Obama was U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder as well as lawmakers like House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.,) Senate Judiciary Chair Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) and House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) Sen. Mike Crapo (R-Idaho,) Rep. Gwen Moore (D-Wis.), sponsors of the reauthorization measure, were onstage, as well as 1994 co-author Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich.)
Also standing behind Obama was Biden, who offered his own thoughts on the importance of the legislation.
“Those of you who have been around a while with me know that I quote my father all the time who literally would say, the greatest sin that could be committed, the cardinal sin of all sins was the abuse of power, and the ultimate abuse of power is for someone physically stronger and bigger to raise their hand and strike and beat someone else,” Biden said. “In most cases that tends to be a man striking a woman, or a man or woman striking a child. That’s the fundamental premise and the overarching reason why John Conyers and I and others started so many years ago to draft the legislation called the Violence Against Women Act.”
The VAWA reauthorization helps protect the LGBT community against domestic violence and supports it victims in three ways:
• First, the law requires all programs that receive funding under VAWA to provide services regardless of a person’s actual or perceived sexual orientation or gender identity.
• Second, the law explicitly includes the LGBT community in the largest VAWA grant program, the “STOP Grant Program,” which provides funding to providers who collaborate with prosecution and law enforcement officials to address domestic violence.
• Lastly, the bill sets up a grant program specifically aimed at providing services and outreach to underserved populations, including programs that provide care specifically for LGBT people.
The LGBT community continues to face issues with domestic violence along the same level as straight people. A 2012 report from the National Coalition of Anti-Violence Programs found 3,930 incidents of domestic violence in the LGBT and HIV/AIDS community in that year. Additionally, the report found that 61.6 percent of LGBT domestic violence victims were denied access to shelters — nearly a 20-point increase from the 44.6 percent in the previous year.
VAWA reauthorization is the second-ever piece of legislation signed into law with explicit pro-LGBT protections. The first legislation with both a reference to sexual orientation and gender identity was the hate crimes protections legislation Obama signed into law in 2009. The Hate Crimes Statistics Act, which collects data on hate crimes, was the first to mention sexual orientation, not gender identity.
The repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” lifted the ban on openly gay servicemembers from the books, but didn’t institute any pro-LGBT protections in its place.
A number of LGBT advocates were present in the auditorium and hailed the enactment of the legislation as yet another milestone for the advancement of LGBT rights.
David Stacey, deputy legislative director for the Human Rights Campaign, lauded VAWA reauthorization for its historical inclusion and its practical impact on LGBT people.
“From a movement perspective, this is a really an important step forward,” he said. “Then, of course, the substantive fact that more and more victims of domestic violence and sexual assault that are LGBT will have access to services when they need them when they are in crisis.”
Mara Keisling, executive director of the National Center for Transgender Equality, said VAWA will be particularly important for the transgender community, which faces high levels of domestic violence as it does with other kinds of violence.
“It really does some really important things for victims of violence and trans people tend to overrepresented in that as victims of that,” she said. “It’s a really important bill on its own, but politically it’s also the second bill to become a law with LGBT people in it, and there was relatively little problem with the LGBT components.”
VAWA reauthorization is also significant because it marks the first time the House under Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) allowed a bill with pro-LGBT language to pass.
However, House Republicans only allowed the bill to pass after a version without LGBT language failed on the House floor. Then, they took up the LGBT-inclusive bill already passed by the Senate.
Julie Kruse, policy director of Immigration Equality, said she’s “thrilled” with the LGBT-inclusion in VAWA reauthorization and hopes that passage in the House bodes well for passage of immigration reform legislation for bi-national same-sex couples.
“We’re thrilled at how much support the president gave to LGBT inclusion, and this is where we are,” she said. “We think it’s a very awesome precedent for the comprehensive immigration reform that’s coming up.”
But Stacey cautioned against giving House Republicans credit for passage of the domestic violence legislation.
“There still was very significant Republican opposition in the House, however, the fact that at the end of the day, they let a bill go that had every Democrat voting for it and a large number of Republicans is a good step forward,” he said. “I think the really significant side is the Senate, where we had a majority of the Republican conference voting for this bill with the sexual orientation and gender identity provisions in it.”
State Department
Rubio mum on Hungary’s Pride ban
Lawmakers on April 30 urged secretary of state to condemn anti-LGBTQ bill, constitutional amendment

More than 20 members of Congress have urged Secretary of State Marco Rubio to publicly condemn a Hungarian law that bans Pride events.
California Congressman Mark Takano, a Democrat who co-chairs the Congressional Equality Caucus, and U.S. Rep. Bill Keating (D-Mass.), who is the ranking member on the House Foreign Affairs Committee’s Europe Subcommittee, spearheaded the letter that lawmakers sent to Rubio on April 30.
Hungarian lawmakers in March passed a bill that bans Pride events and allow authorities to use facial recognition technology to identify those who participate in them. MPs last month amended the Hungarian constitution to ban public LGBTQ events.
“As a NATO ally which hosts U.S. service members, we expect the Hungarian government to abide by certain values which underpin the historic U.S.-Hungary bilateral relationship,” reads the letter. “Unfortunately, this new legislation and constitutional amendment disproportionately and arbitrarily target sexual and gender minorities.”
Prime Minister Viktor Orbán’s government over the last decade has moved to curtail LGBTQ and intersex rights in Hungary.
A law that bans legal recognition of transgender and intersex people took effect in 2020. Hungarian MPs that year also effectively banned same-sex couples from adopting children and defined marriage in the constitution as between a man and a woman.
An anti-LGBTQ propaganda law took effect in 2021. The European Commission sued Hungary, which is a member of the European Union, over it.
MPs in 2023 approved the “snitch on your gay neighbor” bill that would have allowed Hungarians to anonymously report same-sex couples who are raising children. The Budapest Metropolitan Government Office in 2023 fined Lira Konyv, the country’s second-largest bookstore chain, 12 million forints ($33,733.67), for selling copies of British author Alice Oseman’s “Heartstopper.”
Former U.S. Ambassador to Hungary David Pressman, who is gay, participated in the Budapest Pride march in 2024 and 2023. Pressman was also a vocal critic of Hungary’s anti-LGBTQ crackdown.
“Along with years of democratic backsliding in Hungary, it flies in the face of those values and the passage of this legislation deserves quick and decisive criticism and action in response by the Department of State,” reads the letter, referring to the Pride ban and constitutional amendment against public LGBTQ events. “Therefore, we strongly urge you to publicly condemn this legislation and constitutional change which targets the LGBTQ community and undermines the rights of Hungarians to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly.”
U.S. Reps. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), Sarah McBride (D-Del.), Jim Costa (D-Calif.), James McGovern (D-Mass.), Gerry Connolly (D-Va.), Summer Lee (D-Pa.), Joaquin Castro (D-Texas), Julie Johnson (D-Texas), Ami Bera (D-Calif.), Mark Pocan (D-Wis.), Lloyd Doggett (D-Texas), Becca Balint (D-Vt.), Gabe Amo (D-R.I.), Ted Lieu (D-Calif.), Robert Garcia (D-Calif.), Dina Titus (D-Nev.), Raja Krishnamoorthi (D-Ill.), Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.) and Mike Quigley (D-Ill.) and Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-D.C.) signed the letter alongside Takano and Keating.
A State Department spokesperson on Wednesday declined to comment.
Federal Government
HRC memo details threats to LGBTQ community in Trump budget
‘It’s a direct attack on LGBTQ+ lives’

A memo issued Monday by the Human Rights Campaign details threats to LGBTQ people from the “skinny” budget proposal issued by President Donald Trump on May 2.
HRC estimates the total cost of “funding cuts, program eliminations, and policy changes” impacting the community will exceed approximately $2.6 billion.
Matthew Rose, the organization’s senior public policy advocate, said in a statement that “This budget is more than cuts on a page—it’s a direct attack on LGBTQ+ lives.”
“Trump is taking away life-saving healthcare, support for LGBTQ-owned businesses, protections against hate crimes, and even housing help for people living with HIV,” he said. “Stripping away more than $2 billion in support sends one clear message: we don’t matter. But we’ve fought back before, and we’ll do it again—we’re not going anywhere.”
Proposed rollbacks or changes at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services will target the Ryan White HIV/AIDS Program, other programs related to STI prevention, viral hepatitis, and HIV, initiatives housed under the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, and research by the National Institutes of Health and Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.
Other agencies whose work on behalf of LGBTQ populations would be jeopardized or eliminated under Trump’s budget include the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, the U.S. Department of Justice, the U.S. Small Business Administration, and the U.S. Department of Education.
U.S. Supreme Court
Supreme Court allows Trump admin to enforce trans military ban
Litigation challenging the policy continues in the 9th Circuit

The U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday allowed the Trump-Vance administration to enforce a ban on transgender personnel serving in the U.S. Armed Forces pending the outcome of litigation challenging the policy.
The brief order staying a March 27 preliminary injunction issued by the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington notes the dissents from liberal Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson.
On the first day of his second term, President Donald Trump issued an executive order requiring Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth to effectuate a ban against transgender individuals, going further than efforts under his first administration — which did not target those currently serving.
The DoD’s Feb. 26 ban argued that “the medical, surgical, and mental health constraints on individuals who have a current diagnosis or history of, or exhibit symptoms with, gender dysphoria are incompatible with the high mental and physical standards necessary for military service.”
The case challenging the Pentagon’s policy is currently on appeal before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. The lead plaintiff is U.S. Navy Commander Emily Shilling, who is joined in the litigation by other current transgender members of the armed forces, one transgender person who would like to join, and a nonprofit whose members either are transgender troops or would like to be.
Lambda Legal and the Human Rights Campaign Foundation, both representing the plaintiffs, issued a statement Tuesday in response to the Supreme Court’s decision:
“Today’s Supreme Court ruling is a devastating blow to transgender servicemembers who have demonstrated their capabilities and commitment to our nation’s defense.
“By allowing this discriminatory ban to take effect while our challenge continues, the Court has temporarily sanctioned a policy that has nothing to do with military readiness and everything to do with prejudice.
“Transgender individuals meet the same standards and demonstrate the same values as all who serve. We remain steadfast in our belief that this ban violates constitutional guarantees of equal protection and will ultimately be struck down.”
U.S. Solicitor General D. John Sauer noted that courts must show “substantial deference” to DoD decision making on military issues.
“The Supreme Court’s decision to allow the military ban to go into effect is devastating for the thousands of qualified transgender servicemembers who have met the standards and are serving honorably, putting their lives on the line for their country every single day,” said GLAD Law Senior Director of Transgender and Queer Rights Jennifer Levi. “Today’s decision only adds to the chaos and destruction caused by this administration. It’s not the end of the case, but the havoc it will wreak is devastating and irreparable. History will confirm the weight of the injustice done today.”
“The Court has upended the lives of thousands of servicemembers without even the decency of explaining why,” said NCLR Legal Director Shannon Minter. “As a result of this decision, reached without benefit of full briefing or argument, brave troops who have dedicated their lives to the service of our country will be targeted and forced into harsh administrative separation process usually reserved for misconduct. They have proven themselves time and time again and met the same standards as every other soldier, deploying in critical positions around the globe. This is a deeply sad day for our country.”
Levi and Minter are the lead attorneys in the first two transgender military ban cases to be heard in federal court, Talbott v. Trump and Ireland v. Hegseth.
U.S. Rep. Mark Takano (D-Calif.) issued a statement on behalf of the Congressional Equality Caucus, where he serves as chair.
“By lifting the lower court’s preliminary injunction and allowing Trump to enforce his trans troop ban as litigation continues, the Supreme Court is causing real harm to brave Americans who simply want to serve their nation in uniform.
“The difference between Donald Trump, a draft dodger, and the countless brave Americans serving their country who just happen to be trans couldn’t be starker. Let me be clear: Trump’s ban isn’t going to make our country safer—it will needlessly create gaps in critical chains of military command and actively undermine our national security.
“The Supreme Court was absolutely wrong to allow this ban to take effect. I hope that lower courts move swiftly so this ban can ultimately be struck down.”
SPARTA Pride also issued a statement:
“The Roberts Court’s decision staying the preliminary injunction will allow the Trump purge of transgender service members from the military to proceed.
“Transgender Americans have served openly, honorably, and effectively in the U.S. Armed Forces for nearly a decade. Thousands of transgender troops are currently serving, and are fully qualified for the positions in which they serve.
“Every court up to now has found that this order is unconstitutional. Nevertheless, the Roberts Court – without hearing any evidence or argument – decided to allow it to go forward. So while the case continues to be argued, thousands of trans troops will be purged from the Armed Forces.
“They will lose their jobs. They will lose their commands, their promotions, their training, pay and benefits, and time. Their units will lose key players; the mission will be disrupted. This is the very definition of irreparable harm.”
Imara Jones, CEO of TransLash Media, issued the following statement:
“The Supreme Court’s decision to uphold Trump’s ban on transgender soldiers in the military, even as the judicial process works its way through the overall question of service, signals that open discrimination against trans people is fair game across American society.
“It will allow the Trump Administration to further advance its larger goal of pushing trans people from mainstream society by discharging transgender military members who are currently serving their country, even at a time when the military has struggled recently to meet its recruiting goals.
“But even more than this, all of my reporting tells me that this is a further slide down the mountain towards authoritarianism. The hard truth is that governments with authoritarian ambitions have to separate citizens between who is worthy of protection and who’s not. Trans people are clearly in the later category. And this separation justifies the authoritarian quest for more and more power. This appears to be what we are witnessing here and targeting trans people in the military is just a means to an end.”
-
The Vatican17 hours ago
American cardinal chosen as next pope
-
a&e features23 hours ago
Your guide to the many Pride celebrations in D.C. region
-
U.S. Supreme Court3 days ago
Supreme Court allows Trump admin to enforce trans military ban
-
District of Columbia2 days ago
WorldPride permits for National Mall have yet to be approved