News
Santa Fe begins issuing marriage licenses to gay couples
Dozens of same-sex couples hold impromptu mass wedding

Dozens of same-sex couples hold an impromptu mass same-sex wedding in Santa Fe (Photo courtesy of ProgressNowNM).
A county clerk in Santa Fe started issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples on Friday, resulting in dozens of gay couples marrying in a mass wedding.
Santa Fe County Clerk Geraldine Salazar started issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples on Friday afternoon. The first gay couple to receive a marriage license in the county was Liz Stefanics, a Santa Fe county commissioner, and her partner Linda Siegle, a longtime LGBT activist.
Afterwards, at least a dozen recipients of the county’s first licenses held an impromptu mass same-sex wedding in the chambers of the county commission just minutes after receiving their licenses. The couples were pronounced legally married at 3:51 pm.
On Thursday, District Judge Sarah Singleton issued the order for the county to issue the marriage licenses, according to the Associated Press, and was quoted as saying in the decision that “reading a sex or sexual orientation requirement into the laws of New Mexico violates the state constitution.” Singleton reportedly ordered the clerk to grant marriage licenses to gay couples or appear in court Sept. 26 to tell her why that shouldn’t happen.
But in a statement that was read to the Washington Blade by her secretary Jackie Roberson, Singleton clarified the decision was an alternative writ of mandamus and not a decision based on the merits. Apparently, the clerk chose to begin issuing licenses rather than respond to the petition.
“That alternative writ says to do what the petitioner asks or show cause on a specific date why the clerk should not to do that,” Singleton said through the proxy. “An alternative writ is merely a way of giving the respondent a specific time to come in and answer the petition. It does not represent a decision on the merits.”
Singleton’s decision was the result of a lawsuit filed by State Rep. Brian Egolf on behalf by two Santa Fe men. In a statement provided by Progress NOW NM, Salazar explains her decision to begin distributing marriage licenses to same-sex couples.
“Now that Judge Singleton has ordered me to issue a license to Messrs. Hanna and Hudson on constitutional grounds, I intend to do so and to issue a license to any same-sex couple who desires one and are otherwise qualified,” Salazar said. “By complying with the judge’s order, we will be issuing licenses legally and will not continue to use limited county resources on further litigation.”
Pat Davis of ProgressNow New Mexico said in a statement the developments marks a historic development for New Mexico.
“After so many years of seeing these couples have their hopes raised, then dashed it is so rewarding to see progress finally coming,” Davis said. “Elected leaders with political courage stepped forward to do the right thing and we will be forever grateful. And no state could have done marriage equality better. What could be cooler than a mass gay wedding in Santa Fe to celebrate marriage equality?”
The clerk began distributing the licenses to gay couples two days after Doña Ana County Clerk Lynn Ellins began doing the same on his own accord. According to ProgressNOW NM, nearly 100 same-sex couples were married in the county by the start of the next day.
New Mexico Attorney General Gary King said he wouldn’t stop Dona Ana County from issuing marriage licenses for gay couples. He’s previously said he won’t defend New Mexico law against lawsuits seeking marriage equality because he believes that the current statute is unconstitutional. Republican state lawmakers have said they’d intervene to stop the same-sex marriages from occurring.
In the spring, the Santa Fe City Council approved a resolution stating marriage equality was already legal in New Mexico because of the gender-neutral construction of the marriage law after Santa Fe officials, including Mayor David Coss, first proposed the measure in March.
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.
Botswana’s government has repealed a provision of its colonial-era penal code that criminalized consensual same-sex sexual relations.
The country’s High Court in 2019 struck down the provision. The Batswana government in 2022 said it would abide by the ruling after country’s Court of Appeals upheld it.
The government on March 26 announced the repeal of the penal code’s “unnatural offenses” section that specifically referenced any person who “has carnal knowledge of any person against the order of nature” and “permits any other person to have carnal knowledge of him or her against the order of nature.”
Lesbians, Gays and Bisexuals of Botswana, a Batswana advocacy group known by the acronym LEGABIBO, challenged the criminalization law with the support of the Southern Africa Litigation Center. LEGABIBO in a statement it posted to its Facebook on April 25 welcomed the repeal.
“For many, these provisions were not just words on paper — they were lived realities,” said LEGABIBO. “They affected access to healthcare, safety, employment, and the freedom to love and exist openly.”
“LEGABIBO believes that the deletion of these sections is a necessary and long-overdue step toward restoring dignity and aligning our legal framework with constitutional values of equality and human rights,” it added. “It is a clear message that LGBTIQ+ persons are not criminals, and that their lives and relationships deserve protection, not punishment.”
LEGABIBO further stressed that “while this does not erase the harm of the past, it creates space for healing, inclusion, and continued progress toward full equality.”
