Connect with us

News

How bad would a GOP Senate takeover be for LGBT people?

Republicans need to pick up six seats to claim majority

Published

on

Mitch McConnell, Kentucky, Republican Party, United States Senate, U.S. Congress, CPAC, Conservative Political Action Conference, gay news, Washington Blade
Mitch McConnell, Kentucky, Republican Party, United States Senate, U.S. Congress, CPAC, Conservative Political Action Conference, gay news, Washington Blade

Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) would likely become majority leader if Republicans win a majority in the Senate.  (Washington Blade file photo by Michael Key)

The congressional mid-term elections are more than six months away, but political observers are already warning Democrats they could lose control of the U.S. Senate — an outcome that has tongues wagging over its potential impact on LGBT issues.

While analysts agree that Republicans could claim at least six seats to win control of the chamber — such as by knocking off pro-LGBT senators in New Hampshire and Colorado — the general sense is draconian anti-gay measures like the Federal Marriage Amendment won’t emerge even with GOP control of the Senate.

Dan Pinello, a political scientist at City University of New York, noted seven incumbent Democrats are seeking re-election in states Mitt Romney won in 2012 and conservatives like the Koch brothers and Karl Rove are spending hundreds of thousands of dollars through “Super PACs” to affect those races.

“So I think the prospect of a Republican takeover is very close — a virtual tossup right now,” Pinello said. “Everything will depend on the degree to which Democratic voters turn out at the polls in crucial states.”

Republicans are optimistic about their prospects on Election Day 2014 — and virtually no one is suggesting that Democrats can retake control of the House. In an appearance on “Fox News Sunday,” anti-gay GOP strategist Karl Rove predicted GOP victory in the Senate.

“With 14 seats in play on the Democratic side and a couple of seats in play potentially on the Republican side, I think it’s highly likely that Republicans pick up the majority,” Rove said.

On the same day on NBC’s “Meet the Press,” White House Communications Director Dan Pfeiffer defied the predictions by saying he believes “we will keep the Senate.” But his former colleague in the White House, Robert Gibbs — who landed in hot water in 2010 by saying Republicans could take control of the House — expressed a contrary view, saying the Senate is “definitely” in danger in 2014.

“So as a consultant, I can say all these things now,” Gibbs said. “They’ve got to pick up six seats, which is not a small number. But what gives them a huge advantage, obviously, is the states that they’re in…Louisiana and in North Carolina, in Montana, places that the president didn’t do well.”

The heads of both political parties are both bullish about their prospects in 2014. On Tuesday, Republican National Committee chair Reince Priebus predicted at a National Press Club breakfast a “tsunami” and said it’s “going to be a very big win, especially at the U.S. Senate level.” Meanwhile, Democratic National Committee chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz said that Democrats are running “aggressive bottom-up campaigns” and she’s confident her party will hold the Senate.

But political analysts have forecasts more favorable to Republicans. As of Monday, Cook Political Report forecast that Republicans will pick up somewhere between four and six seats, but expected the ultimate gains will be “at the higher end of – and may exceed – that range.”

Larry Sabato, a political scientist at the University of Virginia, said it’s too early to provide a firm prediction on the extent of Republican gains, but said Republicans would net at least four to six seats.

“It’s easy to see how they could get six or even more if President Obama stays in the low 40s and the economy continues to be balky,” Sabato said. “This year, in the sixth-year of President Obama’s administration, you’d much rather be in the GOP’s electoral position than the Democrats’.”

Pro-LGBT Democrats face challenging re-election bids

Democrats elected to the Senate at the start of the Obama administration and who built a reputation for  supporting LGBT rights are among those facing uphill re-election bids.

Among them is Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.) who has championed “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal and the flow of spousal benefits to veterans in same-sex marriages as chief sponsor of the Charlie Morgan Act. A potential challenger for her is former U.S. senator from Massachusetts Scott Brown. Although he voted for “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal during his tenure in the Senate, Brown penned an op-ed for Bay Windows suggesting the pursuit of LGBT rights was a “pet project.”

Sen. Mark Udall (D-Colo.) also faces a tough re-election bid now that Rep. Cory Gardner (R-Colo.) has announced he will run for the Senate. Udall has championed “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal, an end to the Defense of Marriage Act and has written at least two letters to the Obama administration to ensure gay veterans can receive spousal benefits in whichever state they live. Gardner hasn’t articulated a position on same-sex marriage, but voted in favor of an LGBT-inclusive version of the Violence Against Women Act.

The Democrat who’ll likely face the most challenging re-election campaign is Sen. Kay Hagan (D-N.C.). An early supporter of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal, she voted for a repeal amendment in the Senate Armed Services Committee even before the Pentagon report on open service. Hagan came out in favor of same-sex marriage last year on the same day the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments on California’s Proposition 8. She could face any one of a number of Republicans vying for the nomination in the state’s primary.

Also of note is the re-election bid of Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), who as chief sponsor of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act oversaw a bipartisan vote in favor of the bill in the Senate late last year. Merkley has also been the leading voice in the Senate calling on President Obama to sign an executive order barring LGBT employment discrimination among federal contractors. A number of Republican candidates have lined up to challenge Merkley, although he’s expected to win re-election in the heavily “blue” state.

The only Republican who’s expected to face a tough re-election challenge is the one who’s likely to handle the floor schedule in the Senate if the GOP ekes out a win: Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.). In addition to facing a Tea Party challenge, McConnell faces a stiff challenge in the general election from Democratic Kentucky Secretary of State Alison Lundergan Grimes.

Would anti-LGBT legislation move forward?

If the Republicans win control of the Senate, it would create a Congress in which the GOP leads both chambers at a time when the U.S. Supreme Court is expected to deliver a nationwide ruling on marriage equality.

Speaking to the Washington Blade after her event at the National Press Club, Wasserman Schultz initially responded to an inquiry about what a GOP takeover of the Senate would mean for LGBT people by saying, “Oh, God.”

Wasserman Schultz predicted Republicans would curtail the expansion of rights she said are “deserved” by LGBT people in addition to engaging in an “aggressive attempt” to roll them back. But the DNC chair emphasized that won’t happen because Democrats are on track to maintain control of the Senate.

Asked by the Blade whether she thinks Republicans would want to push through a Federal Marriage Amendment, Wasserman Schultz said that “wouldn’t surprise me” because the Republicans endorsed the amendment as part of the 2012 party platform.

But political observers say even with Republicans in control of both chambers, the trend in favor of same-sex marriage — which a recent poll pegged at 59 percent support — would deter Congress from passing a measure that already failed twice under the Bush administration when Republicans had large majorities.

Gregory Angelo, executive director of the Log Cabin Republicans, said he doesn’t foresee a situation in which Republicans would push forward in either chamber with a U.S. constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage.

“Considering the move for a Federal Marriage Amendment in the House following the Supreme Court’s DOMA decision last year went absolutely nowhere tells me that there is little appetite among Republicans to engage in culture wars either in the House or the Senate — in this election cycle and in 2016,” Angelo said.

But there are other pieces of anti-gay legislation that could be seen as an alternative to the Federal Marriage Amendment. Rep. Raul Labrador (R-Idaho) and Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) have introduced legislation known as the Marriage and Religious Freedom Act, which would prohibit the federal government from discriminating against organizations that exercise “religious conscience” against same-sex marriage.

Rep. Randy Forbes (R-Texas) and Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) have introduced the State Marriage Defense Act, which would prohibit the federal government from recognizing same-sex marriage in states where it’s not allowed. The bill may be moot in the event of a Supreme Court ruling in favor of marriage equality.

Sabato nonetheless said he doesn’t see much of an opportunity for anti-LGBT legislation of any kind to make it through the Senate – given the growing support for LGBT rights among Republican senators.

“I think it is very unlikely Susan Collins or Rob Portman would support any stand-alone, anti-LGBT legislation,” Sabato said. “I could see other Republicans joining them, such as Lisa Murkowski. I can’t see a single Senate Democrat voting for such legislation. So I doubt the Senate would pass it.”

In the event that an anti-gay bill was approved by both chambers of Congress, Sabato said the legislation would never become law because President Obama would veto it once it reached his desk.

But Republican control over the Senate could mean an end to progress on pro-LGBT legislation. Under Democratic control, the Senate just barely invoked cloture on ENDA by a vote of 61-30 before approving it on final passage. Meanwhile, the Republican-controlled House has yet to take up ENDA months after the Senate voted to approve it as House Speaker John Boehner threw cold water on it during a meeting with the LGBT Equality Caucus.

Pinello said the danger for the LGBT community in the aftermath of a Republican takeover of the Senate lies in the nomination and confirmation of federal judges — perhaps on the Supreme Court in the event of a vacancy before the final ruling on marriage equality.

“The federal bench is now the most hopeful source of remedy for the denial of marriage equality nationwide, and a Senate controlled by the Republican Party might diminish those prospects,” Pinello said. “Thus, there is very good reason for LGBT voters to turn out for Democratic candidates next November.”

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

U.S. Supreme Court

Nine trans activists arrested outside Supreme Court

Gender Liberation Movement organized demonstration against Skrmetti ruling

Published

on

Protest sign outside of the U.S. Supreme Court on June 18, 2025. (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

On Friday afternoon, nine transgender organizers and allies were arrested on the steps of the U.S. Supreme Court for blocking the street and protesting the recent U.S. v. Skrmetti ruling.

The ruling, decided 6-3 by the conservative majority on Wednesday, upheld Tennessee’s ban on gender-affirming care for minors. The decision will allow states to pass laws restricting gender-affirming care for minors and further minimizes bodily autonomy.

The nine arrested were part of a larger group of more than 30 protesters wearing colors of the trans Pride flag— pink, blue, and white, — standing outside of the nation’s highest court. Organizers unfurled large cloths in pink, blue, and white, shared personal testimonies about how their gender-affirming care was a matter of life and death, released pink and blue smoke, and saw nine trans participants take their hormone replacement therapy.

The protest was led by the Gender Liberation Movement, an organization that “builds direct action, media, and policy interventions centering bodily autonomy, self-determination, the pursuit of fulfillment, and collectivism in the face of gender-based sociopolitical threats.” Among the nine arrested was GLM co-founder Raquel Willis.

Before being arrested, Willis spoke to multiple media outlets, explaining that this decision was an overreach of power by the Supreme Court.

“Gender-affirming care is sacred, powerful, and transformative. With this ruling in U.S. v. Skrmetti, we see just how ignorant the Supreme Court is of the experiences of trans youth and their affirming families,” said Willis. “Everyone deserves the right to holistic healthcare, and trans youth are no different. We will continue to fight for their bodily autonomy, dignity, and self-determination just like previous generations. No court, no law, no government gave us our power, and none can take it away.”

GLM co-founder Eliel Cruz also spoke to media outlets about the Skrmetti ruling, calling it “a historical moment of fascist attacks,” and encouraged the LGBTQ community to “organize and fight back.”

“As a cisgender man, I stand in solidarity with the trans community during these escalating attacks on their safety, well-being, right to exist in this world, and ability to live a future free of violence,” Cruz said. “I’m enraged at the Supreme Court’s decision to uphold a ban on gender-affirming care for youth. My heart hurts for the families and young people who this will negatively impact and harm.”

The Washington Blade reached out to Capitol Police for comment.

A spokesperson said the nine activists were arrested for violating D.C. Code §22-1307 — “Crowding, Obstructing, or Incommoding” — on First Street, N.E., after receiving three warnings.

Continue Reading

District of Columbia

Norton reintroduces bill to ban discrimination against LGBTQ jurors in D.C. Superior Court

Congresswoman notes Congress controls local court system

Published

on

D.C. Congressional Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D) (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

D.C. Congressional Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-D.C.) on Friday, June 20, reintroduced her bill to ban discrimination against LGBTQ D.C. residents in the process for selecting people to serve as jurors in D.C. Superior Court.

“The bill would clarify that D.C. residents may not be excluded or disqualified from jury service in the local D.C. trial court, the D.C. Superior Court, based on sexual orientation or gender identity,” Norton said in a statement.

“Specifically, this bill would clarify that the term ‘sex,’ which is a protected class under the nondiscrimination law that applies to jurors in the D.C. Superior Court includes sexual orientation and gender identity,” Norton said.

She points out in her statement that under the D.C. Home Rule Act approved by Congress that created D.C.’s local government, including an elected mayor and City Council, the federal government retained control over the local court system.

“Therefore, until D.C. is given authority to amend Title 11 of the D.C. Code, which one of my bills would do, an act of Congress is required to clarify that LGBTQ+ jurors in the D.C. Superior Court are protected from discrimination,” according to her statement.

A spokesperson for Norton couldn’t immediately be reached to determine whether Norton is aware of specific instances where residents were denied jury service because of their sexual orientation or gender identity.  

Online records of congressional action on Norton’s juror nondiscrimination bill show she had introduced it in 2019, 2021, and 2023, when it died in committee each year, except for the 117th Congress in 2022, when it was approved by a committee but died in the full House.

“During Pride month we are reminded of the many contributions of the LGBTQ+ community,” Norton said in her June 20 statement. “Nobody, including D.C. jurors, should be discriminated against based on their sexual orientation or gender identity, and D.C. juries should not be deprived of the service of LGBTQ residents,” she added.

Continue Reading

South Sudan

The forgotten struggle: LGBTQ refugees and asylum seekers in South Sudan

June 20 is World Refugee Day

Published

on

U.S. Ambassador to South Sudan Michael Adler visits the Gorom Refugee Settlement on Oct. 25, 2023. The camp's LGBTQ residents remain marginalized. (Photo courtesy of the U.S. Embassy in South Sudan)

As the world prepares to mark World Refugee Day on June 20, discussions will echo across continents about war, displacement, and humanitarian assistance. But there is one story that is often left out — a story of a people who are doubly displaced, constantly under threat, and too often excluded from protection programs. We are the LGBTQ+ refugees and asylum seekers living in South Sudan, particularly in Gorom Refugee Settlement, and our daily struggle for survival continues in silence, far from global headlines and political promises.

We are refugees who fled our homes in Uganda, Rwanda, Burundi, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Ethiopia, and Sudan — countries where being lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, or queer means being hunted by the state, persecuted by society, and disowned by our own families. Many of us first found temporary safety in Kenya, only to be forced to flee once more as hostility and violence found us even there. We ended up in South Sudan, believing it might be safer. But we were wrong.

What we have experienced is a relentless cycle of flight and fear. We are tired of running, tired of hiding, and tired of being treated like we do not exist.

Fleeing persecution, only to face more

The reasons we fled our home countries are all rooted in systemic hate: we were accused of witchcraft, imprisoned for who we love, subjected to forced “conversions” or exorcisms, and physically assaulted by family members and neighbors alike.

Lesbian women in Uganda and Rwanda were forced into marriages with men, some even raped by their own relatives to “cure” them. Gay men in Burundi and Congo were arrested, tortured, and publicly humiliated. Transgender individuals in Ethiopia were stripped of all dignity, mocked in the streets, denied medical treatment, and in some cases beaten to the point of unconsciousness. Bisexual youth were disowned and kicked out of their homes. And queer children — or children simply perceived as different — were molested, assaulted, or abandoned.

We thought Kenya might provide refuge. For a while, it did. But soon, even the refugee camps in Kenya became unsafe. Attacks on LGBTQ+ individuals increased. Some of us were sexually assaulted inside UNHCR facilities. Local authorities turned a blind eye. The Kenyan government ultimately declared it would no longer support resettlement for LGBTQ+ asylum seekers. And so, once again, we fled.

This time, we crossed into South Sudan. And again, we hoped for safety. But at Gorom Refugee Settlement, we found yet another kind of danger — one that is quieter, colder, and just as cruel.

What life looks like in Gorom: constant threat and no protection

At Gorom, we face daily verbal abuse, physical violence, economic isolation, and state indifference. LGBTQ+ refugees are attacked by fellow refugees and members of the local host community. In some cases, we are targeted by our own block leaders, who refuse to distribute food or health services if they suspect we are queer. In clinics, trans women are mocked, told they are “possessed,” and denied even basic medical care. Those of us living with HIV face layers of stigma — our sexual orientation is blamed for our condition, and we are often left without access to lifesaving medication.

Safe housing for LGBTQ+ refugees does not exist in Gorom. Couples are forced to pretend to be siblings or risk being separated — or worse. One gay couple was recently threatened by men in their block who accused them of “bringing demons.” They have not slept in the same shelter since.

Lesbian sisters, sharing a small shelter to survive, told us:

“We sleep in turns at night — one keeps watch while the other rests. We’ve been threatened with rape three times. Our block leader told us to leave or act straight.”

Children of LGBTQ+ parents, or those who are gender non-conforming, are bullied at school or excluded entirely. Some are even denied meals at community kitchens — punished simply for who their parents are.

For many queer women, survival sex work becomes the only option. There is no employment, no support, and no safety. This leads to alarming rates of sexual assault and HIV infection. Yet when they seek help, they are either ignored or blamed.

And while mental health crises are rising, there is no trauma support designed for queer refugees. Many of us have attempted suicide. Some have succeeded.

We have evidence, but no urgency

In early 2024, a SOGIESC (sexual orientation, gender identity and expression, and sex characteristics) assessment was conducted by peer human rights monitors inside Gorom. It documented the situation clearly and thoroughly.

• Many transgender individuals had been physically assaulted in the span of just three months

• Lesbians received death threats or were targeted with “corrective rape”

• LGBTQ+ persons were denied medical services

• Attempted suicide

These are not just statistics. These are names, lives, and stories. And yet, most of the reports were never acted upon. Bureaucratic delays, unclear processes, and shifting responsibilities have turned urgent threats into forgotten files. Each time we cry out for help, we are told to wait. But in our world, waiting can be fatal.

Acknowledging those who have helped; and those who must do more

We extend sincere appreciation to the Commission for Refugee Affairs of South Sudan. Since December 2023, LGBTQ+ refugees were allowed to remain in Gorom with a degree of tolerance. In a country where same-sex relationships are widely condemned, this space mattered. But the relief was short-lived.

We now face an eviction order, issued for June 20, ironically, on World Refugee Day. The government has declared that all LGBTQ+ individuals must leave the settlement. No safe relocation site has been offered. No plan for protection has been shared. Once again, we are being pushed out — not for something we did, but for who we are.

We also recognize the continued engagement of UNHCR South Sudan and some officials working on the ground. Their intent is clear. They listen to our voices, acknowledge our pain, and try to act within their mandates. But the pace of intervention is too slow. In many cases, the process of documentation, assessment, and relocation takes months. By the time help arrives, it is too late.

We also commend the advocacy of Rainbow Railroad, which has raised awareness globally about the plight of LGBTQ+ refugees. Their work has saved lives. But we need them to be faster, more connected to those of us already in danger, and more responsive to grassroots alerts from inside the camps.

If coordination, funding, and trust between grassroots advocates and major institutions could improve, we would not be burying so many of our community members. We would not have to keep writing these cries for help.

Real voices, real pain

“I was beaten because my jeans were ‘too tight.’ They said I looked like a woman. I am a woman — trans — but they made me feel like an animal,” says Daniella, 24.

“We put our names on the protection list. My partner was attacked at the water point the next day. Nobody came to help us,” says Joseph, 31.

“I am HIV-positive. The clinic nurse laughed and said I got it through sin. I haven’t gone back since. I just stay in bed now,” says Amina, 28, a lesbian mother of two.

These are not rare stories. These are everyday truths for queer refugees in South Sudan. And still, we are expected to stay silent and grateful.

Our call to the world

We are not asking for special treatment. We are demanding equal protection under the same humanitarian principles that others receive. We ask that:

• UNHCR and all partner organizations prioritize LGBTQIA+ safety in refugee camps, not as an afterthought but as a core responsibility

• Safe shelters and protection units be created for queer refugees facing internal violence

• LGBTQ+ refugees be consulted in decisions about policies, services, and resettlement programs that affect us directly

• Emergency medical and mental health services be inclusive of queer identities and trauma

• Pathways to resettlement for LGBTQ+ individuals be accelerated, especially for those in crisis.

Let this World Refugee Day mean something

To be queer in a refugee camp is to constantly fight for your life. It means being forgotten by both your country of origin and your supposed place of refuge. It means sleeping in fear, eating in shame, and living without dignity. It means being told that safety exists, but not for you.

We are tired of running. Tired of hiding. Tired of begging for our humanity to be acknowledged. But we are still here. We still believe that the world can listen. And we still believe that justice is possible — if only someone chooses to act.

This World Refugee Day, remember that we are not just refugees. We are LGBTQ+. We are survivors. And we deserve to live.

Abraham Junior lives in the Gorom Refugee Settlement in South Sudan.

Continue Reading

Popular