Politics
Another ‘marriage moment’ before year’s end?
Action underway in New Mexico, Illinois and Hawaii
Marriage equality has come to New Jersey under Gov. Chris Christie as Illinois state Rep. Greg Harris and Hawaii Gov. Neil Abercrombie seek passage of legislation. (Washington Blade photos of Christie and Abercrombie by Michael Key; photo of Greg Harris via Livestream).
The month of October 2013 could go down in history as a milestone in the marriage equality movement.
In addition to New Jersey becoming the 14th state in the country to make same-sex marriage legal, states across the country in recent days saw developments in the legislatures and the courts on marriage equality that could expand that roster of equality states by the end of the month.
James Esseks, director of the LGBT project for the American Civil Liberties Union, predicted during a conference call with reporters last week the activity on same-sex marriage this month could create another “marriage moment.”
“I think we are approaching another marriage moment this fall with potential developments in three to four states coming soon,” Esseks said.
The action on marriage comes on the heels of the filing of new litigation both in federal and state courts as well as new legislative efforts seeking marriage equality initiated after the Supreme Court ruled on the Defense of Marriage Act and California’s Proposition 8 in June.
Dan Pinello, a political scientist at the City University of New York, said the activity on marriage equality at this time is in part the result of the Supreme Court’s actions.
“The high court’s decision unleashed a floodgate of pent-up demand in the LGBT community that is finding true expression in a tidal wave of federal litigation,” Pinello said. “The ruling also prompted an increased awareness of newly recognized constitutional rights among federal judges in the lower courts. The outcomes of all this legal activity will emerge over the next several years.”
The Washington Blade has already provided coverage of developments on marriage equality in New Jersey and Michigan. Here are details on other states in recent weeks.
New Mexico
The New Mexico Supreme Court heard oral arguments on Wednesday in a case brought by all 33 New Mexico clerks, state district courts and a group of same-sex couples seeking a determination on whether state law permits same-sex marriage.
The arguments in the case, Griego v. Oliver, were divided into two portions. The first examined whether the current statutory scheme for marriage under New Mexico law already allows same-sex marriage because portions of it are gender-neutral. In the second, attorneys made their case on whether same-sex couples have a guaranteed right under the state constitution to marry regardless of what the statute says.
Representing Republican lawmakers seeking to prohibit same-sex marriage in New Mexico was attorney James Campbell, who argued that only the legislature has authority to legalize marriage rights for gay couples. Campbell maintained marriage under New Mexico law is reserved for opposite-sex couples because “those unions, unlike same-sex unions, have a natural ability to procreate.”
Campbell also argued that the court shouldn’t determine gay people should be considered a suspect class because they enjoy political power. The legalization of same-sex marriage through state legislatures as well as the Democratic Party and President Obama’s endorsement of same-sex marriage, Campbell said, is evidence of this political power.
Representing the views in court of District Judge Alan Mallot, who had previously ruled that same-sex couples can marry because of the gender-neutral language in the marriage law, was attorney Daniel Ivey-Soto.
Attorney General Gary King sent two attorneys to argue a more middle-ground argument. Assistant Attorney General Scott Fuqua argued that the current gender-neutral statute doesn’t permit same-sex marriage, but Assistant Attorney General Sean Cunniff maintained gay couples should be allowed to marry under the equal protection provisions under the state constitution.
Same-sex couples were represented by attorney Maureen Sanders, who articulated a similar view. She argued the gender-neutral law doesn’t allow gay couples to marry in New Mexico, but said “denying same-sex couples the right to marry is a violation of the New Mexico Constitution.”
Sanders also argued gay people should be considered a suspect class. The court shouldn’t look to the recent advancement in LGBT equality, she said, but the long history of discrimination the LGBT community has experienced.
Justices appeared skeptical of the idea of continuing to ban same-sex couples from marrying in New Mexico. In response to Campbell’s argument that marriage is for procreation, Chief Justice Charles Daniels noted many benefits related to marriage aren’t given to couples based on whether they’ve had children.
Despite hopes that the court would issue a ruling on marriage equality at the conclusion of the arguments, justices signaled as they began they would need more time. It’s unclear when a decision could come down, although it could be a matter of weeks.
Nevada
The federal marriage equality case that is closest to the Supreme Court is also seeing movement as proponents of marriage equality — following the lead of Lambda Legal, which is responsible for the lawsuit — were set to weigh in on bringing marriage equality to Nevada.
On Oct. 18, Lambda Legal filed a 100-page brief before the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in the case of Sevcik v. Sandoval, a lawsuit the organization filed last year. Because the case is now before an appellate court, it’s the most advanced lawsuit that’s pending before federal courts.
The opening brief makes use of the U.S. Supreme Court decision against the Defense of Marriage Act by arguing that Nevada’s ban on same-sex marriage deprives gay couples of the crucial benefits just as the anti-gay federal law had done.
“By foreclosing same-sex couples from marriage, Nevada inflicts virtually the same collection of federal harms and deprivations on unmarried same-sex couples as DOMA previously did, since nearly all federal benefits are unavailable to unmarried couples, regardless of whether they are registered domestic partners,” the brief states.
A major component of the argument that Lambda makes against the ban on same-sex marriage is the state’s domestic partnership system is inadequate for gay couples even though it provides them the legal equivalent of marriage.
“Relegating same-sex couples to registered domestic partnership is no remedy,” the brief states. “That novel, inferior status qualifies unmarried same-sex couples for virtually no federal benefits, and instead designates same-sex couples as second-class citizens and subjects them to a host of practical difficulties and vulnerabilities.”
Accompanying the opening brief is a motion to the court for permission to file another brief no longer than 26,500 words for “an adequate exposition of the plaintiff couple’s claims.”
Friend-of-the-court briefs in favor of marriage equality were also due in the case on Wednesday. That marks the opportunity for the Obama administration to weigh in on the lawsuit by filing its own friend-of-the-court brief in the case. Lambda has previously said it would “welcome” a brief from the U.S. Justice Department in the case, but as of Tuesday had no information on whether one would be forthcoming.
Illinois
All eyes will be on the Illinois Legislature in the coming days as lawmakers return for a “veto session” that will likely include a vote in the State House on marriage equality.
On Tuesday, the first day of the veto session, supporters held a “March on Springfield” to urge passage of the marriage equality legislation. Speakers at a rally held near the State Capitol Building included Gov. Pat Quinn and U.S. Sen. Richard Durbin (D-Ill.).
According to Buzzfeed, Durbin invoked the Supreme Court decision against DOMA while speaking before the estimated 2,300 attendees about passing marriage equality legislation.
“Now that the Supreme Court has ruled, I say to members of the Illinois House of Representatives, you have an awesome and historic decision,” Durbin said. “Will you offer to everyone married in our state — regardless if straight, gay, lesbian, whatever — will you offer them the same federal benefits, or will you discriminate against some.”
The regular session of the legislature concluded in May, to the dismay of supporters of same-sex marriage, without a vote on same-sex marriage legislation in the House that was earlier passed in the Senate. Gay State Rep. Greg Harris declined to bring the legislation to a vote because he believed it lacked sufficient support for passage.
Bernard Cherkasov, CEO of Equality Illinois, expressed confidence that lawmakers would act during the veto session to pass the legislation based on recent polling data from Fako & Associates in Lisle, IL, showing a 12-point margin in support of marriage equality.
“Amongst key constituencies like African Americans, there’s a 20-point spread, amongst Latino voters, there’s a 30-point spread, amongst American Catholics, there’s a 30-point spread,” Cherkasov said. “There’s strong business support. Illinoians expect lawmakers will do their job and the pass the bill.”
Because the legislature in is in a veto session, different rules apply to passing legislation. A bill that would go into effect immediately, as the Senate-passed marriage equality legislation does, would require a supermajority of 71 votes in the House for passage. But bills that go into effect at a later date need only a simple majority of 60 votes for passage. The veto session consisted of two days this week, followed by a break, and another three days when lawmakers return on Nov. 5.
Cherkasov said the bill is “definitely within striking distance” in the House for votes to passage under the lower 60-vote threshold, which he said could be arranged by amending the House bill to go into effect on June 1 and passing that bill in the Senate.
Asked whether he wants the bill to come up for a vote during the veto session regardless of whether supporters think it has the necessary votes, Cherkasov said, “I do believe that if it came to the floor that it would pass.”
Advocates are pursuing same-sex marriage legislation in Illinois as a state lawsuit seeking marriage equality in the state, Darby v. Orr, is pending in Cook County Circuit Court.
Hawaii
Efforts to pass same-sex marriage legislation are also underway in Hawaii, where Gov. Neil Abercrombie has called for a special session of the legislature starting Oct. 28 for the purpose of debate and passage of marriage equality.
Donald Bentz, executive director of Equality Hawaii, said he’s “optimistic” the session will lead to marriage equality in the Aloha State because of stories of “love and commitment” heard by legislators.
“Polls indicate that the majority of Hawaii’s residents support marriage equality and are buoyed by the growing list of business, faith, political and nonprofit leaders who are standing up in support of the freedom to marry,” Bentz said.
Depending upon the length of time the legislature chooses to debate the marriage bill, the special session could go as quickly as five working days or take two full weeks.
Bentz said the marriage equality legislation enjoys “a wide margin” of support in the Senate, but not so much in House. A vote tally conducted by the Honolulu Civil Beat last month found that 26 House members support the legislation. Passage of the bill in that chamber requires 27 votes.
Since the time that article was published, Bentz said State Rep. Karen Awana has gone on record as a “no” vote, but State Rep. Mark Takai has come out as a “yes” vote. That would give the bill the 27 votes necessary for passage.
Advocates are pursuing same-sex marriage legislation in Hawaii as litigation seeking marriage equality in the state, Jackson v. Abercrombie, is pending alongside the Nevada lawsuit in the Ninth Circuit.
Tennessee
The most recent lawsuit seeking marriage equality in the federal court system was filed on Tuesday by the National Center for Lesbian Rights on behalf of four legally married same-sex couples seeking recognition of their unions.
The lawsuit, known as Tanco v. Haslam, was filed by the National Center for Lesbian Rights and private attorneys Abby Rubenfeld, Maureen Holland, Regina Lambert along with the firm of Sherrard & Roe and is pending before the U.S. District Court in the Middle District of Tennessee.
Shannon Minter, NCLR’s legal director, said the lawsuit is a useful addition to other cases pending in 19 other states because it helps draw attention to the lack of LGBT rights in the South.
“We think it is important to bring cases that highlight the damage that is being caused by discriminatory state marriage bans across the country, including especially in southern states,” Minter said. “I am very hopeful we will obtain a positive result in this case, which would be hugely beneficial to LGBT people in Tennessee, and also be a huge boost to creating even more positive national momentum.”
One couple in the lawsuit, Dr. Valeria Tanco and Dr. Sophy Jesty, is expecting their first child this spring and is worried state law won’t recognize them both as legal parents. Another couple, Sgt. Ijpe DeKoe and Thom Kostura, married just before DeKoe was deployed for a tour of duty in Afghanistan.
The litigation is one of two cases seeking marriage equality in federal courts lying within the U.S. Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals. The other case is the federal litigation pending before the district court in Michigan.
Congress
Top Democrats re-introduce trans bill of rights
Lawmakers spoke outside US Capitol on Wednesday
U.S. Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) and U.S. Reps. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), and Sara Jacobs (D-Calif.) announced the reintroduction of a “Trans Bill of Rights” on Wednesday.
Despite chilling winds and snow on the ground, transgender activists, LGBTQ rights advocates, and trans-supporting lawmakers gathered outside the U.S. Capitol to announce the reintroduction of the “Transgender Bill of Rights” resolution to protect trans Americans, as the Trump-Vance administration continues to target LGBTQ Americans.
About 30 people gathered outside to hear from legislators and individuals impacted by recent White House policies.
“Today we say loud and clear that trans rights are human rights, and they must be protected every single day of every single year,” Markey told the crowd. “We stand together in solidarity with the trans community and with those who have too often been left behind by a system that refuses to recognize their humanity. We are here to ensure that every trans and gender-diverse person in America can live freely and safely and authentically. That’s what the Trans Bill of Rights is all about.”
Markey is leading the resolution on the Senate side, while Jayapal is pushing it forward in the House.
“With the Trans Bill of Rights, we are laying out a comprehensive vision to provide protections for transgender and nonbinary people — a vision that ensures every single person has a chance to thrive,” Jayapal said. “A vision that says: you are us, you belong, and you are worthy of the same rights as everyone else. This bill supports amending the Civil Rights Act to ensure that trans people have the same rights and protections as all other Americans. It creates a level playing field where trans people no longer have to fight tooth and nail to get the same treatment as their cisgender friends.”
The resolution for House and the Senate reads:
“Recognizing that it is the duty of the federal government to develop and implement a Transgender Bill of Rights to protect and codify the rights of transgender and nonbinary people under the law and ensure their access to medical care, shelter, safety, and economic security.”
Trans Legislation Tracker, an independent research organization that collects data on anti-trans legislation from the hyper-local level to the floor of the U.S. Senate, found that in 2025, 1,022 measures were proposed across the country to restrict the rights of trans Americans — from health care removals to bathroom bans.
Markey directly called out those lawmakers for what he described as discriminatory actions taken against trans Americans who, as he pointed out, are fighting for rights that everyone else is inherently given.
“Trump and MAGA Republicans have used the power of government to spread fear and hate across our country. They have tried to ban lifesaving and medically necessary health care, strip anti-discrimination protections, and turn trans lives into political talking points for their benefit. Well, we have a message for them: we are louder, we are stronger, and we are not going anywhere. We’re in this fight for the long term,” the Massachusetts senator said.
Jacobs, a co-chair of the Transgender Equality Task Force within the Congressional Equality Caucus, also spoke at the event.
“Trans Americans are being targeted just for being who they are — by laws and court decisions that try to erase them from classrooms, from courts and fields, from health care and public life. These attacks aren’t about safety or fairness,” Jacobs said. “They’re about hatred and instilling fear. And we know how quickly fear can warp into suspicion and violence with deadly consequences.”
In addition to lawmakers, trans Americans and supporters spoke.
Olivia Hunt from Advocates for Trans Equality, LaLa Zannell from the American Civil Liberties Union, as well as three additional people who have been actively harmed by the ongoing wave of anti-trans legislation, shared their stories.
Hunt emphasized the staggeringly high number of anti-trans bills being introduced in statehouses across the country — despite trans adults making up less than 1 percent of the population, according to the Williams Institute’s 2025 data.
“Since 2020, thousands of anti-LGBTQIA+ bills have been introduced in statehouses across the country,” Hunt said. “It’s a veritable tidal wave of political bullying disguised as legislation, and most of these bills specifically target transgender and nonbinary people — especially trans youth and their families. This is a moment that demands action.”
Hunt, who is trans, helps trans people in D.C. obtain legal documents that match their gender identity — something the Trump-Vance administration has stopped.
“Trans youth deserve to be protected by their government. They shouldn’t have to be protected from their government,” she said. “It’s long past time that our federal laws reflect and protect the reality and dignity of all people. Trans people have always existed — we are your neighbors, your family members, your community — and we belong.”
Zannell, who spoke proudly about her trans identity, explained why the bill is necessary and how it would protect trans people in all facets of their lives.
“I stand here as an unapologetic Black trans woman who has led this movement for over a decade to get us to moments like this. The reintroduction of the Trans Bill of Rights will aim to protect access to gender-affirming care, prevent discrimination in housing and public spaces, and preserve legal recognition,” Zannell said. “My hope is that this affirms our government’s duty to protect all trans and nonbinary people.”
The Transgender Bill of Rights is cosponsored in the Senate by U.S. Sens. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), and Peter Welch (D-Vt.).
In the U.S. House of Representatives, the resolution is led by Jayapal, co-led by Jacobs and U.S. Rep. Mark Takano (D-Calif.), with nearly 100 other representatives signing on as co-sponsors.
“To all trans people across the United States: you are seen, you are valued, and you are loved,” said Markey. “And I want you to know there are people who will fight for you every single day on the floor of the House and Senate to win those rights for you.”
2026 Midterm Elections
LGBTQ Victory Fund looks beyond Washington for change in 2026
Vice President of Political Programs Daniel Hernández spoke with Blade
As the Trump-Vance administration enters its second year, LGBTQ people from around the country are running for public office amid fears of the removal of federal civil rights laws that could lead to rollbacks in protections.
The Washington Blade sat down with Daniel Hernández Jr., the newly made vice president of political programs for the LGBTQ Victory Fund, a nonpartisan political action committee dedicated to electing openly LGBTQ individuals to all levels of government, to discuss why now is more important than ever to actualize LGBTQ political power.
Hernández is often credited with saving the life of then-U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-Ariz.) while working as her 20-year-old intern in Tucson, Ariz., in 2011. He served on the Pima County School Board and in the Arizona House of Representatives from 2017-2023, advocating for LGBTQ rights, healthcare access, and education.
Founded in 1991, the Victory Fund was created by a group of prominent LGBTQ political voices, including Dallas gay rights activist William Waybourn and former Human Rights Campaign Fund Executive Director Vic Basile, who were inspired by the success of EMILY’s List, a PAC that works to elect Democratic women to office.
Since its founding, the Victory Fund has worked with LGBTQ advocates and LGBTQ-supportive donors who recognized the need to prepare LGBTQ people to run for office nationwide.
When asked where LGBTQ people and allies need to focus looking ahead, Hernández emphasized that 2026 will be won or lost at the state and local level.
“One of the bigger things that people may not be paying as close attention to as we really should is the impact of state and local races. Federal races are crucial, obviously, but the folks who are actually able to have an impact in a meaningful way right now are not the people in the U.S. House or Senate,” Hernández said. “It can take years before a bill even moves through Congress. Meanwhile, state and local leaders are the ones standing up and fighting for our rights today. Especially during this Trump administration, that’s where the real action is happening.”
He expanded on that point, saying that at this moment in the U.S. political landscape, statewide races matter far more than they are often given credit for — particularly as 2026 is a midterm year under President Donald Trump. People who win elected office in midterm years, Hernández explained, are many times viewed as legislators pushing back against the administration at the top.
“Looking at 2026 in particular, because it’s a midterm year, people sometimes forget just how many critical statewide races are on the ballot. We have people like Chris Mayes in Arizona, who won by less than 300 votes in a battleground state and is now running for reelection,” he said. “These are the races that protect democracy and protect people’s rights in real time. If we ignore them, we’re doing so at our own peril. Statewide offices are where so much power actually lives.”
Hernández also urged LGBTQ voters and donors to think critically about where their time, money, and energy are going — particularly as resources remain limited heading into 2026 and not every race is winnable.
“I think one thing we don’t do enough as a community is pause and ask whether our resources are actually going where they can have an impact. If someone is running against a Republican in a plus-20 Republican state that hasn’t elected a Democrat in decades, do I really need to give my limited resources there? Or does it make more sense to support candidates in competitive states like Arizona or Wisconsin? In 2026, we have to be more strategic, because our resources are not unlimited. Winning matters.”
That calculation, Hernández said, also means moving away from what he described as emotionally driven donations and toward a more deliberate strategy.
“Our community is incredible at rallying when we’re angry, and I call that ‘rage giving.’ Someone awful is in office, a challenger pops up, and we all open our wallets. But what we really need to be doing is asking where that money will actually move the needle. In 2026, it’s not enough to feel good about donating — we have to make sure those donations help candidates who can realistically win. That’s how we protect LGBTQ rights long term.”
Asked how the Victory Fund determines which candidates receive endorsements — especially amid a growing field of openly LGBTQ contenders — Hernández emphasized that viability is central to the organization’s approach in 2026.
“One of the things we’re really focused on in 2026 is viability. We’re not endorsing people who have a zero-percent chance of winning. We’re looking at candidates who are running strong campaigns, who have plans, who are fundraising, and who are doing the work. That’s important because our community deserves guidance it can trust. When you see a Victory endorsement, it means we believe that candidate can actually win.”
Hernández also pushed back on the long-standing notion that being openly LGBTQ is a political liability — an argument that has resurfaced amid right-wing attacks on LGBTQ candidates.
“There’s been this long-standing perception that being LGBTQ is a liability and that it can cost Democrats elections. But when you actually look at the data, that just isn’t true. The reality is that being LGBTQ is not a risk — it’s often a strength. Voters care about roads, health care, affordability, and jobs, not fear-based caricatures. In 2026, we’re seeing more LGBTQ candidates than ever because people understand that now.”
That shift, he added, has helped reframe what LGBTQ candidates are actually campaigning on — despite efforts by conservatives to reduce them to culture-war issues.
“The so-called ‘gay agenda’ is not bathrooms. It’s making sure people have access to health care, that roads are safe, and that families can afford to live. LGBTQ candidates are talking about the same bread-and-butter issues as everyone else. That’s why the idea that LGBTQ candidates cost elections just doesn’t hold up. In fact, we’re seeing them lead on some of the most important issues facing voters right now.”
As misinformation and fear-based narratives continue to dominate right-wing messaging, Hernández said openly LGBTQ elected officials play a crucial role in countering those attacks — both through policy and presence.
“First and foremost, any elected official’s responsibility is to their constituents. That’s what we’re seeing from LGBTQ officials who are focused on affordability, health care access, and consumer protections while Republicans obsess over culture-war nonsense,” Hernández said. “But there’s also a responsibility to be authentic. Being honest about who you are and why you fight matters. That authenticity cuts through fear-based disinformation.”
Looking ahead to 2026, Hernández pointed to transgender elected officials as a particular source of momentum and optimism, even amid intensified political attacks.
“Our trans elected officials are honestly at the forefront of some of the biggest battles we’re facing right now. Despite relentless attacks and vilification, they are still delivering results for their communities. That tells me something incredibly powerful about where the country is headed. Even in this political climate, trans leaders are winning and governing. That gives me a lot of hope for 2026.”
Ultimately, Hernández said the stakes of the upcoming cycle extend far beyond a single election, shaping the future of LGBTQ political leadership nationwide.
“The leaders we elect at the state and local level today are the members of Congress and senators of tomorrow. People don’t just wake up one day and run for Congress — they come from city councils, state legislatures, and school boards. That’s why 2026 is so important. If we invest now, we’re not just defending our rights in the moment, we’re building the next generation of LGBTQ leadership.”
Victory Fund’s endorsed candidates
Incumbents Endorsed: January 2026
- Helen Grant (they/them) – Norman City Council, Ward 4, Okla.
- Louie Minor (he/him) – Bell County Commission, Precinct 4, Texas
- Jonathan West (he/him) – Manchester Selectboard, Vt.
- George Leach (he/him) – Court of Common Pleas, Franklin County Judge, Ohio
- John Fredrickson (he/him) – Nebraska State Senate, District 20
- Ben Bowman (he/him) – Oregon House of Representatives, District 25
- Jeffrey Prang (he/him) – Los Angeles County Assessor, Calif.
- Amie Carter (she/her) – Sonoma County Superintendent of Schools, Calif.
- Elinor Levin (she/her) – Iowa House of Representatives, District 89
- Ken Carlson (he/him) – Contra Costa County Supervisor, District 4, Calif.
- Emma Pinter (she/her) – Adams County Commission, District 3, at-large, Colo.
- Justin Chenette (he/him) – York County Commission, District 3, Maine
- Kris Fair (he/him) – Maryland House of Delegates, District 3
- Jennifer Cornell (she/her) – Ann Arbor City Council, Ward 5, Mich.
- Darlene Martinez (she/her) – Constable, El Centro – Downtown Phoenix, Ariz.
- Brian Garcia (he/him) – Arizona House of Representatives, District 8
- Christian Phelps (he/him) – Wisconsin State Assembly, District 93
- Jack Patrick Lewis (he/him) – Massachusetts House of Representatives, 7th Middlesex
- Will Brownsberger (he/him) – Massachusetts State Senate, Suffolk and Middlesex Counties
- Julian Cyr (he/him) – Massachusetts State Senate, Cape & Islands District
- CM Hall (she/they) – Newport City Council, Ore.
- Jimmy Mack (he/him) – Southampton Town Trustee, N.Y.
- Michael Vargas (he/him) – Elk Grove USD Board of Education, Area 2, Calif.
- Lisa Grafstein (she/her) – North Carolina State Senate
- Hector Bustos (he/him) – Trustee, Santa Ana Unified School District, Calif.
Newly Endorsed Candidates – January 2026
- Kirk McPike (he/him) – Virginia House of Delegates, District 5
- Winn Decker (he/him) – North Carolina House of Representatives, District 37
- Jonathan Lambert-Melton (he/him) – Wake Co. Board of Commissioners, At-Large, N.C.
- Karen Stegman (she/her) – Orange County Board of Commissioners, At-Large, N.C.
- Landon Campbell (he/him) – Hays County Criminal District Attorney, Texas
- Christine Castillo (she/her) – Bexar County District Clerk, Texas
- Nicholas “Nico” Costilla (he/him) – Hays County Clerk, Texas
- Davis Mendoza Darusman (he/him) – Harris Co. Justice of the Peace, Pct. 5, Pl. 2, Texas
- Nicholas Palmer (he/him) – Justice, Fifth Court of Appeals, Texas
- José “Che-Che” Wilson (he/him) – Cook County Board of Commissioners, District 12, Ill.
- Sarah Bury (she/her) – Metropolitan Water Reclamation District Board of Commissioners, Ill.
For more information of the LGBTQ Victory Fund’s endorsments, qualifications, or on how to register to receive an endorsement, visit the organization’s website at victoryfund.org
Congress
New Equality Caucus vice chair endorses Equality Act, federal trans bill of rights
Salinas talks about her personal road to LGBTQ advocacy
Rep. Andrea Salinas, the new vice chair of the Equality Caucus, sat down with the Blade to discuss the battles ahead as she demands protections for LGBTQ Americans.
Salinas is no stranger to government service. The daughter of a Mexican immigrant, she graduated from the University of California, Berkeley, and soon became a valued member of multiple Democratic offices — including working as a congressional aide to U.S. Sen. Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and U.S. Reps. Pete Stark (D-Calif.) and Darlene Hooley (D-Ore.). From there, she served six years in the Oregon House of Representatives before being elected to Congress, representing areas south of Salem and parts of southern Portland. With her new role in the Equality Caucus, Salinas vows to push protections for LGBTQ Americans in every room she enters.
The Washington Blade spoke with Salinas last week following her leadership announcement to discuss what the role means to her, why she — as a straight woman— feels it is her duty to fight for LGBTQ protections, and how she views the current state of the country.
When asked why she decided to take on a leadership role within the Equality Caucus, Salinas explained that she was already doing the work — but that the timing of the caucus’s outreach, coupled with what she described as a growing threat posed by the Trump-Vance administration, made the moment feel especially urgent.
“I was actually asked to take on this role because of the work I’ve already been doing. I didn’t seek out a title— the Congressional Equality Caucus came to me, and I was honored by that,” the Oregon representative told the Blade. “I’ve been a lifetime advocate, first as a mother and then as a legislator. With Trump back in office and the shackles off, kids are vulnerable right now, and they’re being attacked. We need champions, and with or without a title, I was going to do this work anyway.”
That work includes passing LGBTQ-related education policy during her time in the Oregon House of Representatives, requiring the Oregon Department of Education to train teachers on how to better support LGBTQ students. She also backed legislation aimed at preventing LGBTQ-related bullying and harassment, while using her platform to ensure educators had the skills needed to address trauma in the classroom. Salinas also pushed for Oregon’s 2013 conversion therapy ban and played a role in defending it.
Salinas said her personal motivation for expanding and protecting LGBTQ rights is rooted in the experiences of her daughter, Amelia.
“My daughter is queer, and she has known who she is since she was a child,” Salinas said. “She presents very masculine, and I’ve had to advocate for her her entire life — from whispers on soccer sidelines to fears about using the bathroom when she was just three or four years old. That kind of bullying and harassment stays with you as a parent. It became part of who I am, part of my ‘mama bear’ advocacy. When I entered public office, continuing that fight was the most natural thing in the world.”
That “mama bear” advocacy, she said, now extends far beyond her own family.
“Across this country, kids are vulnerable right now, and Trump is attacking them,” she said. “My daughter was devastated after the 2024 election— she said, ‘They’re coming after us,’ and she was right. That fear is real, especially for transgender youth. Civil rights should be expanding, not being stripped away from certain communities. That’s why this fight feels so urgent.”
Since returning to the White House in 2024, the Trump administration has moved to roll back anti-discrimination protections, particularly those affecting transgender people. These efforts include barring transgender people from serving openly in the military, blocking access to gender-affirming medical care in federal health programs, challenging state laws that protect transgender students on religious grounds, and arguing that the Constitution entitles employers to discriminate against LGBTQ people based on religious beliefs — even in states with nondiscrimination laws.
For Salinas, the Equality Caucus’s most urgent task under the Trump-Vance administration is advancing what she called a long-sought but non-negotiable priority: the Equality Act.
The Equality Act would add explicit protections based on sexual orientation and gender identity to federal law. Despite more than five decades of debate on Capitol Hill, no version of the bill has yet become law.
“We have to keep pushing the Equality Act— there’s no way around that. No one should be discriminated against in housing, employment, credit, or healthcare because of who they are,” Salinas said. “Republicans are making LGBTQ identity a political wedge because they think it’s expedient, and that’s unacceptable. Sexual orientation and gender identity should not matter in determining someone’s access to opportunity. Yet here we are, still having to fight for that basic principle.”
Salinas added that advancing legislation like the Equality Act requires compassion— even when that compassion is not returned— and a commitment to education.
“We have to meet people where they are— Democrats, Republicans, independents, all of them. Until you know a family, or understand someone’s lived experience, it can feel abstract and overwhelming,” she said. “Education, compassion, and empathy are essential to moving the dial. When people understand this is about human rights, not politics, conversations start to change. That’s how we build broader support.”
She also emphasized the need for a federal transgender bill of rights, which would provide explicit protections for transgender Americans amid what she described as an increasingly hostile federal environment.
“A transgender bill of rights would clarify that discrimination against transgender and nonbinary people is illegal — in employment, housing, credit, and healthcare,” Salinas said. “What’s happening right now, with efforts to criminalize doctors for providing evidence-based care, is unheard of and dangerous. We also need to ban conversion therapy nationwide, because states are increasingly trying to undo those protections through the courts. These safeguards are about ensuring people can live safely and with dignity. That should not be controversial.”
Mental health is another central focus of Salinas’s work. She said ensuring children have access to support— particularly LGBTQ youth— is critical to their long-term wellbeing.
After the Trump administration eliminated the LGBTQ-specific option from the 988 Suicide and Crisis Lifeline, Salinas said her reaction was one of outrage.
“When Trump shut down the 988 press-three option for LGBTQ youth, I was apoplectic,” she said. “It is one of the simplest, most upstream ways to save lives, and it felt arbitrary, cruel, and inhumane. We know the suicide risk among transgender youth is far higher than among non-LGBTQ kids. Connecting them with someone who understands their experience can be life-saving. This should be bipartisan, and I’m going to keep pushing to restore it.”
“You cannot be what you cannot see….” she added while reflecting on the handful of LGBTQ leaders who have— and continue to— navigate the halls of Congress to protect their community. “When Sarah McBride was elected, my daughter met with her and walked out glowing… joyful, hopeful, and excited about the future. That kind of representation changes lives. Electing LGBTQ leaders changes the trajectory for people across the country. Grassroots organizing and electoral power go hand in hand, and we need both.”
With Salinas’s experience in both the Oregon House of Representatives and the U.S. House of Representatives, she said that while one arena may reach more people, change often begins locally, especially when combating anti-LGBTQ attacks.
“I’ve seen how misinformation fuels fear at the local level— whether it’s school board fights or bathroom debates rooted in baseless claims. There is no data to support these scare tactics,” she said, echoing her past work with the Oregon Department of Education. “What actually helps is facts, education, and training teachers to better support LGBTQ students. I passed legislation in Oregon to give educators real tools to prevent bullying and harassment. That kind of work matters just as much as what we do in Congress.”
Despite just being named vice chair of the Equality Caucus, the Blade asked Salinas what legacy she hopes to leave, particularly when it comes to LGBTQ advocacy.
“I want people to be able to live authentically, without fear from their government or their neighbors. That means passing real legislation— the Equality Act and a transgender bill of rights— so protections are not dependent on who’s in power. Civil and human rights are meant to expand, not contract.
“I’ve been doing this work since I became a mother, and I’ll keep doing it for as long as it takes. My daughter deserves it, and so does every LGBTQ person in this country.”
Magic is happening for Round House’s out stage manager
Four bisexual women on stereotypes, erasure, representation, and joy
Unconventional love: Or, fuck it, let’s choose each other again
Pride flag raised at Stonewall after National Park Service took it down
Trans students not included in new India University Grants Commission equity rules
McPike wins special election for Va. House of Delegates
Attitude! French ice dancers nail ‘Vogue’ routine
N.Y. lawmaker vows ‘Pride flag will fly again’ at Stonewall Monument
Meet D.C.’s Most Eligible Queer Singles
