National
Santa Fe mayor says ‘time has come’ for N.M. marriage equality
Coss expects court action, but ultimately a decision to allow same-sex couples to marry

Santa Fe Mayor David Coss is arguing same-sex marriage is already legal in New Mexico (Photo public domain)
Santa Fe Mayor David Coss has a simple reply when asked why he decided to declare same-sex marriage is already legal in New Mexico: “I think the time has come.”
Speaking with the Washington Blade on Tuesday, Coss said he and other city officials issued an opinion and a proposed resolution saying marriage equality is legal in New Mexico because the state legislature adjourned on Saturday without addressing the issue.
“We think it’s legal in New Mexico,” Coss said. “If you look at the constitution, and you look at the statutes, there’s no prohibition. I think just as a matter of equal rights under the law, we ought to move.”
Along with City Council member Patti Bushee, Coss unveiled the proposed resolution on Tuesday saying same-sex marriage is legal in New Mexico and county clerks should begin granting marriage licenses to gay couples. On the same day, City Attorney Geno Zamora issued an opinion affirming those views — observing no law in the state explicitly bans same-sex marriage and gay couples have equal protections under the state constitution.
Coss, who has a gay daughter, said he expects same-sex couples will soon be able to marry in New Mexico.
“The resolution that we have introduced to [the] city council and the legal opinion that our attorney’s office did also provides what’s the legal steps if the clerks won’t issue the licenses, but we’ve been waiting for the legislature to address this for 25 years,” Coss said.
This action from city officials comes more than two years after an opinion from state Attorney General Gary King stating same-sex marriage is legal in New Mexico. However, his opinion does not have the force of law.
Coss said he expects the resolution and opinion will mostly go before district court, then to the New Mexico Supreme Court for a final resolution.
“If the Supreme Court agrees with us, then that’ll take us to New Mexico being the 10th state to recognize same-sex marriage,” Coss said.
It wouldn’t be the first time county clerks in New Mexico began issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples.
On Feb. 20, 2004, Sandoval County Clerk Victoria Dunlap began issuing marriage licenses to gay couples — awarding more than 60 licenses to them — until the state attorney general issued an opinion saying the marriages were invalid on the same day.
Asked if there’s any danger gay couples who marry in New Mexico could suffer harm if they discover their unions are later invalid, Coss acknowledged a danger but said harm is being done to couples “who don’t have their rights builds every day.”
“We just think we’re in a good position,” Coss said. “I think the legal opinion is sound. I think the attorney general’s opinion saying that we should recognize same-sex marriages from other states in New Mexico just begs the question: So why not for New Mexicans?”
Coss said while he plans to introduce the resolution to the City Council on March 27, action won’t happen until April 24. Therefore, he doesn’t think it’ll have an impact on U.S. Supreme Court oral arguments next week on California’s Proposition 8 and the Defense of Marriage Act.
Before making the announcement, Coss said he spoke with numerous LGBT rights group in New Mexico about the decision, including Progress New New Mexico, the main group coordinating the initiative, as well as Equality New Mexico and the Human Rights Alliance in Santa Fe. But Coss said he hasn’t spoken to national groups, including the Human Rights Campaign, about the decision.
According to Coss, no group or person has said to him personally that issuing the decision at this time is a bad idea, however, he said he’s heard that sentiment expressed elsewhere.
Further, Coss was unabashed about the what the move would mean for New Mexico if it were to join nine states and D.C. in marriage equality.
“I would be very proud for New Mexico to be the 10th state,” Coss said. “I’m very proud of the city of Santa Fe. We’ve been a leader in labor rights, immigrants and rights for gay and lesbian people. So, I think we’re making the right statement and the right opinion, and I feel pretty confident that before too much longer, same-sex couples in New Mexico will have equal rights with the rest of New Mexicans.”
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.
National
BREAKING NEWS: Shots fired at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner
Shooter reportedly opened fire inside hotel
Four loud bangs were heard in the International Ballroom of the Washington Hilton during the annual White House Correspondents’ Dinner on Saturday.
According to the Associated Press, a shooter opened fire inside the hotel outside the ballroom.
Attendees could hear four loud bangs as people started to duck and take cover. During the chaos sounds of salad and glasses were dropped as hotel employees, and guests ducked for cover.
The head table — which included President Donald Trump, Vice President JD Vance, first lady Melania Trump, and White House Correspondents Association President Weijia Jiang — were rushed off stage.
“The U.S. Secret Service, in coordination with the Metropolitan Police Department, is investigating a shooting incident near the main magnetometer screening area at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner,” the U.S. Secret Service said in a statement. “The president and the First Lady are safe along all protects. One individual is in custody. The condition of those involved is not yet known, and law enforcement is actively assessing the situation.”
Trump held a press conference at the White House after he left the hotel.
“A man charged a security checkpoint armed with multiple weapons and he was taken down by some very brave members of Secret Service,” said Trump.
Trump said the shooter is from California. He also said an officer was shot, but said his bullet proof vest “saved” him.
D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser, interim D.C. police chief Jeffrey Carroll, U.S. Attorney for D.C. Jeanine Pirro, and other officials held their own press conference at the hotel.
Carroll said the gunman who has been identified as Cole Tomas Allen was armed with a shotgun, handgun, and “multiple” knives when he charged a Secret Service checkpoint in a hotel lobby. Carroll also told reporters that law enforcement “exchanged gunfire with that individual.”
Both he and Bowser said the gunman appeared to act alone.
“We are so very thankful to members of law enforcement who did their jobs tonight and made sure all guests were safe,” said Bowser. “Nobody else was involved.”
The Washington Blade will update this story as details become more available.
