News
Reid to set up ENDA vote before Thanksgiving
Bill to stop anti-LGBT job bias to come to Senate floor this work period

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) is set to announce he’ll bring ENDA to floor this Thanksgiving (Blade file photo by Michael Key).
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) announced on the Senate floor Monday that he’ll bring up the Employment Non-Discrimination Act for a vote before Thanksgiving.
In his first remarks following a short recess, Reid said the bill, which would prohibit anti-LGBT bias in the workforce, would be among the items the Senate will take up during the four-week work period.
“We’re going to consider the act known as ENDA,” Reid said, adding that it “failed in the House of Representatives before, but we’re going to take it up here again.”
Adam Jentleson, a Reid spokesperson, said the exact floor timing “remains to be determined based on how votes go this week,” but a vote on the long pursued legislation to prohibit anti-LGBT job bias could come up as early as next week.
Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), chief sponsor of ENDA, praised Reid in a statement for the decision to bring ENDA to the floor in the coming weeks.
“I thank Majority Leader Reid for committing to bring ENDA to the floor this work period. Americans understand that it’s time to make sure our LGBT friends and family are treated fairly and have the same opportunities,” Merkley said. “Now it’s time for our laws to catch up. People should be judged at work on their ability to do the job, period.”
The Senate Health, Education, Labor & Pensions Committee reported out ENDA on bipartisan basis in July by a 15-7 vote. Sen. Mark Kirk (R-Ill.), an original co-sponsor of the bill, and Sens. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) and Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) joined all 12 Democratic members of the committee in voting in favor of the legislation.
The legislation is unlikely to proceed to the floor by unanimous consent, so 60 votes will be necessary to end a filibuster. That hurdle is higher than the 54 senators who currently sponsor the bill.
Fred Sainz, vice president of communications for the Human Rights Campaign, expressed gratitude that Reid is poised to bring the bill to floor vote and said 60 votes are within sight.
“We’re gratified that Senator Reid is bringing this important bill to the floor,” Reid said. “Over the course of the past six months, we’ve worked hard to ensure that senators know their constituents support this bill. We’re in the homestretch of securing the 60 votes necessary and remain optimistic that the support will be there when we need it.”
Tico Almeida, president of Freedom to Work, was more bullish and said 60 votes are already present on the floor to pass ENDA.
“We’re ready for a winning vote,” Almeida said. “After months of Republican outreach led by our Legislative Director Christian Berle and teamed with Log Cabin Republicans, we’re confident we have the 60 votes to defeat any attempted filibuster.”
The goal of finding 60 votes to pass ENDA in the Senate is a small hurdle in comparison to finding sufficient support for passing the bill in the House, where Republican control will make passage daunting to say the least.
Mara Keisling, executive director of the National Center for Transgender Equality, expressed gratitude that a Senate vote on ENDA would take place, but suggested that a House vote will have to come at later time when the makeup is different.
“Because of all the work people have done over the years at the grassroots level and on Capitol Hill, we’re optimistic that the Senate vote will go our way,” Keisling said. “The forthcoming Senate vote will change the playing field once we have a friendlier House that can tackle ENDA.”
Advocacy groups have been ramping up their efforts on ENDA in expectations that a Senate vote on the bill would take place sometime this fall. The most prominent among them is Obama’s political arm, Organizing for Action.
Last week, Organizing for Action held a conference call with supporters and Matt McTighe, campaign manager for Americans for Workplace Opportunity, to discuss the legislation. The organization has also sent out to email blasts to supporters asking them to let the senators know that backing ENDA “is about standing up for what’s right.”
Ben Finkenbinder, an OFA spokesperson, said his organization is helping to pass ENDA because it’s about making sure all Americans have equal opportunity in the workplace.
“OFA is working to make sure Americans know what is at stake in the ENDA fight, ensuring all Americans who work hard have a fair shot — which means every American having the same protections in the workplace, no matter who they are or whom they love,” Finkenbinder said.
With the exception of three lawmakers, every Democrat in the Senate is an ENDA co-sponsor. The three holdouts are Sens. Mark Pryor (D-Ark.), Joe Manchin (D-W.V.) and Bill Nelson (D-Fla.). Additional Republicans that Log Cabin has said could support the bill are Sens. Rob Portman (R-Ohio), Kelly Ayotte (R-N.H.), Dean Heller (R-Nev.), Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.) and Pat Toomey (R-Pa.).
According to a Friday report in the Washington Post, Cindy McCain has also engaged in lobbying efforts to encourage her husband Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) to back ENDA. She signed a postcard from the Human Rights Campaign urging her husband to support the bill.
The Post reported that HRC organizer John Gomez spotted Cindy McCain at a Staples in Arizona. After talking with her about ENDA, Cindy McCain said she shared her support for the bill, signing the postcard and addressed it to her husband, according to the Post.
Freedom to Work’s Almeida said his organization has been pursuing Latino voters in efforts to encourage senators in Florida, Arizona in Nevada, which have significant Latino populations, to support the legislation.
“Last week we launched phone-banking to thousands of registered Latino voters in Arizona and Nevada asking them to patch-through to Senators McCain, Flake and Heller to urge them to vote ‘yes,'” Almeida said. “We’re using bilingual call centers and the same parameters for Latino voter lists that national Latino organizations used earlier this year to flood the Senate with calls in favor of immigration reform.”
Congress
Advocates say MTG bill threatens trans youth, families, and doctors
The “Protect Children’s Innocence” Act passed in the House
Georgia Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene has a long history of targeting the transgender community as part of her political agenda. Now, after announcing her resignation from the U.S. House of Representatives, attempting to take away trans rights may be the last thing she does in her official capacity.
The proposed legislation, dubbed “Protect Children’s Innocence Act” is among the most extreme anti-trans measures to move through Congress. It would put doctors in jail for up to 10 years if they provide gender-affirming care to minors — including prescribing hormone replacement therapy to adolescents or puberty blockers to younger children. The bill also aims to halt gender-affirming surgeries for minors, though those procedures are rare.
Greene herself described the bill on X, saying if passed, “it would make it a Class C felony to trans a child under 18.”
According to KFF, a nonpartisan source for health policy research, polling, and journalism, 27 states have enacted policies limiting youth access to gender-affirming care. Roughly half of all trans youth ages 13–17 live in a state with such restrictions, and 24 states impose professional or legal penalties on health care practitioners who provide that care.
Greene has repeatedly introduced the bill since 2021, the year she entered Congress, but it failed to advance. Now, in exchange for her support for the National Defense Authorization Act, the legislation reached the House floor for the first time.
According to the 19th, U.S. Rep. Sarah McBride (D-Del.), the first trans member of Congress, rebuked Republicans on the Capitol steps Wednesday for advancing anti-trans legislation while allowing Affordable Care Act tax credits to expire — a move expected to raise health care costs for millions of Americans.
“They would rather have us focus in and debate a misunderstood and vulnerable one percent of the population, instead of focusing in on the fact that they are raiding everyone’s health care,” McBride said. “They are obsessed with trans people … they are consumed with this.”
Polling suggests the public largely opposes criminalizing gender-affirming care.
A recent survey by the Human Rights Campaign and Global Strategy Group found that 73 percent of voters in U.S. House battleground districts oppose laws that would jail doctors or parents for providing transition-related care. Additionally, 77 percent oppose forcing trans people off medically recommended medication. Nearly seven in 10 Americans said politicians are not informed enough to make decisions about medical care for trans youth.
The bill passed the House and now heads to the U.S. Senate for further consideration.
According to reporting by Erin Reed of Erin In The Morning, three Democrats — U.S. Reps. Henry Cuellar and Vicente Gonzalez of Texas and Don Davis of North Carolina — crossed party lines to vote in favor of the felony ban, joining 213 Republicans. A total of 207 Democrats voted against the bill, while three lawmakers from both parties abstained.
Advocates and lawmakers warned the bill is dangerous and unprecedented during a multi-organizational press call Tuesday. Leaders from the Human Rights Campaign and the Trevor Project joined U.S. Rep. Becca Balint (D-Vt.), Dr. Kenneth Haller, and parents of trans youth to discuss the potential impact of restrictive policies like Greene’s — particularly in contrast to President Donald Trump’s leniency toward certain criminals, with more than 1,500 pardons issued this year.
“Our MAGA GOP government has pardoned drug traffickers. They’ve pardoned people who tried to overthrow the government on January 6, but now they want to put pediatricians and parents into a jail cell for caring for their kids,” said Human Rights Campaign President Kelley Robinson. “No one asked for Marjorie Taylor Greene or Dan Crenshaw or any politician to be in their doctor’s office, and they should mind their own business.”
Balint, co-chair of the Congressional Equality Caucus, questioned why medical decisions are being made by lawmakers with no clinical expertise.
“Parents and doctors already have to worry about state laws banning care for their kids, and this bill would introduce the risk of federal criminal prosecution,” Balint said. “We’re talking about jail time. We’re talking about locking people up for basic medical care, care that is evidence-based, age-appropriate and life-saving.”
“These are decisions that should be made by doctors and parents and those kids that need this gender-affirming care, not certainly by Marjorie Taylor Greene.”
Haller, an emeritus professor of pediatrics at St. Louis University School of Medicine, described the legislation as rooted in ideology rather than medicine.
“It is not science, it is just blind ideology,” Haller said.
“The doctor tells you that as parents, as well as the doctor themselves, could be convicted of a felony and be sentenced up to 10 years in prison just for pursuing a course of action that will give your child their only chance for a happy and healthy future,” he added. “It is not in the state’s best interests, and certainly not in the interests of us, the citizens of this country, to interfere with medical decisions that people make about their own bodies and their own lives.”
Haller’s sentiment is echoed by doctors across the country.
The American Medical Association, the nation’s largest organization that represents doctors across the country in various parts of medicine has a longstanding support for gender-affirming care.
“The AMA supports public and private health insurance coverage for treatment of gender dysphoria and opposes the denial of health insurance based on sexual orientation or gender identity,” their website reads.
Rodrigo Heng-Lehtinen, senior vice president of public engagement campaigns at the Trevor Project, agreed.
“In Marjorie Taylor Greene’s bill [it] even goes so far as to criminalize and throw a parent in jail for this,” Heng-Lehtinen said. “Medical decisions should be between patients, families, and their doctors.”
Rachel Gonzalez, a parent of a transgender teen and LGBTQ advocate, said the bill would harm families trying to act in their children’s best interests.
“No politician should be in any doctor’s office or in our living room making private health care decisions — especially not Marjorie Taylor Greene,” Gonzalez said. “My daughter and no trans youth should ever be used as a political pawn.”
Other LGBTQ rights activists also condemned the legislation.
Tyler Hack, executive director of the Christopher Street Project, called the bill “an abominable attack on the transgender community.”
“Marjorie Taylor Greene’s last-ditch effort to bring her 3-times failed bill to a vote is an abominable attack on the transgender community and further cements a Congressional career defined by hate and bigotry,” they said. “We are counting down the days until she’s off Capitol Hill — but as the bill goes to the floor this week, our leaders must stand up one last time to her BS and protect the safety of queer kids and medical providers. Full stop.”
Hack added that “healthcare is a right, not a privilege” in the U.S., and this attack on trans healthcare is an attack on queer rights altogether.
“Marjorie Taylor Greene has no place in deciding what care is necessary,” Hack added. “This is another attempt to legislate trans and queer people out of existence while peddling an agenda rooted in pseudoscience and extremism.”
U.S. Rep. Mark Takano (D-Calif.), chair of the Congressional Equality Caucus, also denounced the legislation.
“This bill is the most extreme anti-transgender legislation to ever pass through the House of Representatives and a direct attack on the rights of parents to work with their children and their doctors to provide them with the medical care they need,” Takano said. “This bill is beyond cruel and its passage will forever be a stain on the institution of the United States Congress.”
The bill is unlikely to advance in the Senate, where it would need 60 votes to pass.
The White House
EXCLUSIVE: Democracy Forward files FOIA lawsuit after HHS deadnames Rachel Levine
Trans former assistant health secretary’s name changed on official portrait
Democracy Forward, a national legal organization that works to advance democracy and social progress through litigation, policy and public education, and regulatory engagement, filed a lawsuit Friday in federal court seeking to compel the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services to release information related to the alteration of former Assistant Secretary for Health Adm. Rachel Levine’s official portrait caption.
The lawsuit comes in response to the slow pace of HHS’s handling of multiple Freedom of Information Act requests — requests that federal law requires agencies to respond to within 20 working days. While responses can take longer due to backlogs, high request volumes, or the need for extensive searches or consultations, Democracy Forward says HHS has failed to provide any substantive response.
Democracy Forward’s four unanswered FOIA requests, and the subsequent lawsuit against HHS, come days after someone in the Trump-Vance administration changed Levine’s official portrait in the Hubert H. Humphrey Building to display her deadname — the name she used before transitioning and has not used since 2011.
According to Democracy Forward, HHS “refused to release any records related to its morally wrong and offensive effort to alter former Assistant Secretary for Health Admiral Rachel Levine’s official portrait caption.” Levine was the highest-ranking openly transgender government official in U.S. history and served as assistant secretary for health and as an admiral in the U.S. Public Health Service Commissioned Corps from 2021 to 2025.
Democracy Forward President Skye Perryman spoke about the need to hold the Trump-Vance administration accountable for every official action, especially those that harm some of the most targeted Americans, including trans people.
“The question every American should be asking remains: what is the Trump-Vance administration hiding? For an administration that touts its anti-transgender animus and behavior so publicly, its stonewalling and silence when it comes to the people’s right to see public records about who was behind this decision is deafening,” Perryman said.
“The government’s obligation of transparency doesn’t disappear because the information sought relates to a trailblazing former federal official who is transgender. It’s not complicated — the public is entitled to know who is making decisions — especially decisions that seek to alter facts and reality, erase the identity of a person, and affect the nation’s commitment to civil rights and human dignity.”
“HHS’s refusal to respond to these lawful requests raises more serious concerns about transparency and accountability,” Perryman added. “The public has every right to demand answers — to know who is behind this hateful act — and we are going to court to get them.”
The lawsuit also raises questions about whether the alteration violated federal accuracy and privacy requirements governing Levine’s name, and whether the agency improperly classified the change as an “excepted activity” during a lapse in appropriations. By failing to make any determination or produce any records, Democracy Forward argues, HHS has violated its obligations under federal law.
The case, Democracy Forward Foundation v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. The legal team includes Anisha Hindocha, Daniel McGrath, and Robin Thurston.
The Washington Blade reached out to HHS, but has not received any comment.
The lawsuit and four FOIA requests are below:
The White House
Empty seats, canceled shows plague Kennedy Center ahead of Trump renaming
It would take an act of Congress to officially rename the historic music venue, despite the Trump-appointed board’s decision.
The board of the Kennedy Center in Washington, D.C., voted to rename it the Trump-Kennedy Center, according to the White House Press Office.
White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt announced the decision in a post on X Thursday, thanking the president for his work on the cultural center “not only from the standpoint of its reconstruction, but also financially, and its reputation.”
Speaking to reporters later that day at the White House, Trump said he was “surprised” and “honored” by the board’s vote.
“This was brought up by one of the very distinguished board members, and they voted on it, and there’s a lot of board members, and they voted unanimously. So I was very honored,” he said.
Earlier this year, GOP Rep. Mike Simpson of Idaho introduced an amendment that would have renamed the building after first lady Melania Trump, later saying she had not been aware of his efforts prior to the amendment’s public introduction.
Despite the board’s vote (made up of Trump-appointed loyalists), the original laws guiding the creation of the Kennedy Center during the Eisenhower, Kennedy, and Johnson administrations explicitly prohibit renaming the building. Any change to its name would require an act of Congress.
Trump has exerted increasing control over the center in recent months. In February, he abruptly fired members of the Kennedy Center’s board and installed himself as chair, writing in a Truth Social post at the time, “At my direction, we are going to make the Kennedy Center in Washington D.C., GREAT AGAIN.”
In that post, Trump specifically cited his disapproval of the center’s decision to host drag shows.
He later secured more than $250 million from the Republican-controlled Congress for renovations to the building.
Since Trump’s takeover, sales of subscription packages are said to have declined, and several touring productions — including “Hamilton” — have canceled planned runs at the venue. Rows of empty seats have also been visible in the Concert Hall during performances by the National Symphony Orchestra.
“The Kennedy Center Board has no authority to actually rename the Kennedy Center in the absence of legislative action,” House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries told reporters.
For decades, the Kennedy Center has hosted performances by LGBTQ artists and companies, including openly queer musicians, choreographers, and playwrights whose work helped push LGBTQ stories into the cultural mainstream. Those artists include the Gay Men’s Chorus of Washington, Harvey Fierstein, and Tennessee Williams.
In more recent years, the center has increasingly served as a space for LGBTQ visibility and acceptance, particularly through Pride-adjacent programming and partnerships.
That legacy was on display at this year’s opening production of Les Misérables, when four drag performers — Tara Hoot, Vagenesis, Mari Con Carne, and King Ricky Rosé — attended in representation of Qommittee, a volunteer network uniting drag artists to support and defend one another amid growing conservative attacks.
“We walked in together so we would have an opportunity to get a response,” said Tara Hoot, who has performed at the Kennedy Center in full drag before. “It was all applause, cheers, and whistles, and remarkably it was half empty. I think that was season ticket holders kind of making their message in a different way.”
The creation of the Kennedy Center is outlined in U.S. Code, which formally designates the institution as the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts.
As a result, it appears unlikely that Congress will come together to pass legislation allowing the historic venue to be renamed.
