News
Calif. trans law ‘unlikely’ to qualify for referendum
Only 75 percent of required signatures deemed valid
Gov. Jerry Brown signed a law that says schools must allow trans students to use the bathrooms and locker rooms and play on sports teams that match their gender identification. (Photo public Domain)
A recently signed transgender student rights law in California may be secure as one LGBT advocate says it’s unlikely opponents of the law have submitted enough legitimate signatures to put the measure up for referendum.
A total of 504,760 signatures were due last Thursday, which are required to place the law, known as the School Success & Opportunity Act, on the ballot for the 2014 election. Opponents of the measure, led by the Privacy for All Students Coalition, submitted 613,120 signatures from a majority of state counties in favor of overturning the law.
But they’re averaging just 75 percent authenticity in the random sample as of Friday, which is significantly below the average ultimately needed to qualify. If the number of valid signatures is less than 95 percent of the 504,760 needed, the measure would fail to qualify for the ballot.
John O’Connor, executive director of Equality California, said “it’s unlikely, [but] it’s not impossible” that the measure will come up for referendum given the signature validation percentage at this point.
“They’re going to need an 81.41 percent validity rate to qualify for the ballot,” O’Connor said. “You can see that they’re well below it currently. That 81.41 percent would be well above the average for any signature gathering activity. So, I mean there’s very real reason to hope that they’re not going to, but nothing’s conclusive itself until the process ends, and, sadly, we just have to give it it’s time to work.”
Although the results of 11 counties have been examined, the signatures from 47 counties have yet to be reviewed. Of these 47, three have yet to report their signature data — Amador, Mono and Mariposa — but they’re small and the signatures there are unlikely to affect the outcome of the validation process.
The deadline for the California Secretary of State to complete the random sample validation is Jan. 8.
If opponents of the law were found to have between 95 and 110 percent valid names in the random sample of the required total, the California Secretary of State would require a full check of signatures, which could mean the verification process could go into mid-March.
A random sample in which more than 110 percent of the names were deemed valid of the required total would mean the measure would immediately qualify for the ballot.
The law, signed by California Gov. Jerry Brown on Aug. 13, requires California public schools to respect students’ gender identity and ensures transgender students have access to school activities, facilities and sports teams in accordance with their gender identity.
O’Connor said “it’s terrible” that opponents of the law would even make the attempt to strip it from the books.
“This is an attack on perhaps the most vulnerable population in our community,” O’Connor said. “They’ve solidly lost on marriage, and so now they’re going to try to go after transgender kids. It’s just despicable.”
While the referendum on the law may be doomed, it’s still possible for opponents of the law to repeal it through the ballot initiative process. Moreover, opponents could go a step further and completely remove gender identity from non-discrimination laws if they so desired. A statutory ballot initiative would require 504,760 signatures to qualify for the ballot; a constitutional amendment would require 807,615 names.
But the time period to gather signatures for the ballot initiative process has already begun. Opponents of the student law would have to submit signatures before six months passes after Brown signed the measure into law, which means that four months remain for them to take action.
O’Connor said he doesn’t know if opponents of the law will pursue this course, but noted it’ll be more difficult as time goes by.
“The fact that the clock has been ticking and they’re losing time right now, it’s curious to me, it makes me wonder what they’re up to,” O’Connor said. “It makes me uncertain whether they will or they won’t.”
The Privacy for All Students Coalition didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment on the assessment of the signature validation process or whether the group intends to pursue a ballot initiative.
Mara Keisling, executive director of the National Center for Transgender Equality, said she shares the optimism that efforts to repeal the California student law will fail.
“While we wait for the official results of the signature verification, we’re optimistic that, because of our friends in California, the ballot initiative will fail,” Keisling said. “The Transgender Law Center, the National Center for Lesbian Rights and Equality California, among others, moved quickly to counter the repeal effort. And what we’ve shown is that campaigning against transgender kids won’t win in California or anywhere else.”
District of Columbia
‘Queer Love’ campaign launched to address domestic violence
D.C. event set for LGBTQ+ Domestic Violence Awareness Day on May 28
The D.C.-based Wanda Alston Foundation, which provides housing and support services for homeless LGBTQ youth, announced earlier this month that it has joined partner organizations to launch a Queer Love Shouldn’t Hurt campaign aimed at addressing domestic violence within the LGBTQ community.
In a May 18 statement, the Alston Foundation said the campaign involves a public awareness initiative leading up to LGBTQ+ Domestic Violence Awareness Day scheduled for May 28.
“Domestic and family violence in LGBTQ+ communities is real and too often invisible,” Cesar Toledo, the Alston Foundation’s executive director, said in the statement. “As a community, we do not talk about it enough, and that silence can leave survivors feeling isolated and alone,” he said. “We must break that silence.”
He added that culturally competent care for those impacted by domestic violence is available through a newly launched website, queerlove.org, “where people can safely access vital resources, educational toolkits, and support networks they need on their healing journey.”
The website announces one of the project’s first events, a Queer Love Community Social, was scheduled for Thursday, May 28, from 6-8 p.m. at the D.C. LGBTQ+ Community Center at 1827 Wiltberger St., N.W.
“Join us this LGBT+ Domestic Violence Awareness Day for a community social dedicated to visibility and survivor resilience,” the website statement says. “Let’s gather to strengthen our bonds, honor the path to healing, and share free resources,” it says of the May 28 event.
The website also announces a June 1 workshop called Empowering Survivors of LGBTQ+ Intimate Partner Violence, which it says will be presented by Jesse Wedell, an official with the D.C. LGBT+ Counseling Collaborative. The website provides an online form to register for the workshop upon which its location would be disclosed.
It identifies the partner organizations working with the Alston Foundation on the Queer Love Public Awareness Campaign as the LGBT+ Counseling Collaborative, Whitman-Walker Health, the D.C. LGBTQ+ Community Center, and Equality Chamber.
The resources and information provided by the project can be accessed at www.queerlove.org.
2026 Midterm Elections
Ken Paxton wins Texas Republican primary runoff
LGBTQ rights opponent will face Democrat James Talarico in November
Attorney General Ken Paxton won the Republican Senate primary in Texas on Tuesday, ousting incumbent U.S. Sen. John Cornyn.
Paxton won the primary against the four-term incumbent in large part due to President Donald Trump’s endorsement. Despite Cornyn voting with Trump more than 90 percent of the time, political insiders say being supportive isn’t enough to win Trump’s endorsement anymore — Republican candidates need to embrace the full MAGA image, something Paxton has done.
Paxton has served as Texas attorney general since 2015 and, before that, worked as a Texas state representative. He has approached both roles with what LGBTQ activists call a “consistently Anti-LGBTQ+ Record.” Following the landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision in Obergefell v. Hodges — the case that made same-sex marriage the law of the land — Paxton advised Texas county clerks they could refuse marriage licenses to same-sex couples on religious grounds.
His anti-LGBTQ crusade doesn’t stop at fighting against marriage equality.
Paxton has repeatedly demanded medical records for transgender youth in multiple states — including Texas, Georgia, and Washington — in hopes of making the practice illegal. His anti-trans actions go far past medical records. Paxton issued an opinion barring trans Texans from changing the sex on their driver’s licenses and birth certificates, claiming any changes made were “unlawfully altered,” and helped the DOJ reach an agreement with a Texas’s children’s hospital for providing minors gender-affirming care, eventually leading to a 10 million dollar settlement. He also authored a non-legally binding opinion equating gender-affirming healthcare for youth to child abuse.
In addition to his long history of anti-LGBTQ policy in the Lone Star State, Paxton is no stranger to controversy.
Multiple impeachment efforts brought against him in the state House of Representatives for “abuse of office” — with the state Senate later acquitting him — allegations that he used his office to assist large campaign donors, namely Nate Paul, and a widely publicized separation from his wife, state Sen. Angela Paxton, all impacted his run for the U.S. Senate seat — but not enough to keep him from the office.
Lynne Bowman, vice president of campaigns at the Human Rights Campaign, issued a statement following the announcement of Paxton’s primary win.
“Texans have a clear choice this fall, and an opportunity to reject failed policies that hurt all families,” Bowman sent to the Blade via email. “Ken Paxton is so out of step that he has fought to undercut marriage equality and spent time demanding personal medical records for young people who do not even live in Texas, all while becoming the most corrupt politician in America. The more than 2 million Equality Voters in Texas will send him packing.”
Paxton will face off against Democratic hopeful and vocal Trump critic James Talarico in the fall.
Talarico, who won the Democratic primary in April against Congresswoman Jasmine Crockett, has been a vocal supporter of LGBTQ rights, citing his ministry work as the source of his support for the community.
The race for Texas’s Senate seat will be decided on Nov. 3.
China
China’s top court acknowledges anti-LGBTQ discrimination
Postgraduate student petitioned for legal clarification
China’s Supreme People’s Court on May 8 issued a rare response to a petition involving LGBTQ discrimination.
In a surprising response; it discussed sexual orientation, gender identity, and gender expression. The response also mentioned workplace discrimination, public humiliation, and school bullying, language considered uncommon from China’s legal system.
The response stemmed from a proposal submitted by a postgraduate student in Qingdao through China’s xinfang petition system on March 25, urging the court to establish clearer judicial standards against discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity. Six weeks later, the Supreme People’s Court Research Office issued a written reply.
The Research Office is an internal legal and policy body within the Supreme People’s Court. It studies legal issues, drafts judicial guidance, and responds to legal inquiries submitted through official channels. Its responses do not carry the same legal weight as a judicial interpretation or court ruling.
“The opinions and suggestions you raised are of great value,” reads a translated version of the Supreme People’s Court Research Office response. “In order to thoroughly implement the Constitution, Civil Code, Employment Promotion Law and other legal provisions, and effectively protect citizens’ personality rights from infringement, the Supreme People’s Court has guided local courts at all levels to handle a number of related cases, and through typical cases and other forms has clarified adjudication rules.”
The response stated that courts may determine public insults, defamation and, discriminatory conduct targeting sexual orientation, gender identity and gender expression as infringement of personality rights. It also said employers treating individuals differently in hiring, employment, transfer or dismissal based on those characteristics could face employment discrimination claims. Schools could also bear legal responsibility for improper discipline or bullying involving students based on sexual orientation, gender identity and gender expression, according to the response.
“It’s not a systematic change from the authorities recognizing LGBTQ rights,” said Renn Hao, an LGBTQ activist in China. “However, it’s an informal statement from the Supreme Court. According to a scholar researching LGBTQ legal cases in China, courts are recognizing more cases involving LGBTQ discrimination and same-sex partners through their verdicts.”
China decriminalized consensual same-sex sexual relations in 1997 and removed homosexuality from the country’s list of mental disorders four years later. Chinese law, however, does not recognize same-sex relationships.
Public advocacy involving LGBTQ issues also remains tightly controlled. Authorities in recent years have continued restricting community organizing, public events, and online expression involving sexual minorities.
Discussions involving LGBTQ issues are also frequently censored on Chinese social media platforms.
Activists and advocacy groups say Chinese authorities in recent years have removed online content, shut down LGBTQ student group accounts and restricted public discussion involving sexual minority issues. After the Supreme People’s Court response began circulating online, related posts and articles were also removed from some Chinese platforms.
“It may still be too early to fully assess the long-term impact, as this development has only just happened and the situation is still unfolding,” said Xiaogang Wei, a Beijing-based LGBTQ rights activist, filmmaker, and founder of the China Rainbow Collective Foundation. “Although the reply is not legally binding, it represents a rare form of institutional acknowledgment of SOGIE-related discrimination in China. For Chinese LGBTQ people and advocates, this could become a meaningful reference point for future legal advocacy, public communication, and community awareness.”
Wei said the rapid removal of related posts and articles limited the development’s broader public impact and underscored how fragile LGBTQ visibility remains in China.
“This is why we believe it is important to continue sharing verified information and ensuring that this development is not erased from public understanding,” Wei said.
Chinese courts in recent years have also heard a number of LGBTQ-related employment discrimination cases, despite the absence of explicit nationwide protections based on sexual orientation or gender identity. In one notable case, the Supreme People’s Court in 2018 formally recognized “equal employment rights disputes” as a legal cause of action, allowing some discrimination-related cases to proceed through the courts.
Chinese courts have previously handled several LGBTQ-related disputes involving employment discrimination, custody, and so-called conversion therapy. In 2024, a Beijing court drew attention after recognizing visitation rights for a child involving a same sex couple, a decision activists described as a milestone for LGBTQ families in China.
‘How to Survive a Plague’ screens June 5
‘Queer Love’ campaign launched to address domestic violence
Ken Paxton wins Texas Republican primary runoff
China’s top court acknowledges anti-LGBTQ discrimination
