National
Alabama, Tennessee governors sign anti-LGBT bills
Measures target families, trans residents

Gov. Kay Ivey (R-Ala.) signed an anti-LGBT adoption bill. (Photo by Fort Rucker; courtesy Wikimedia Commons)
Governors in Alabama and Tennessee have signed into law a pair of measures that could allow discrimination against LGBT families seeking to adopt a child or jeopardize their ability to obtain state benefits.
In Alabama, Gov. Kay Ivey signed into law on Wednesday House Bill 24, which is titled the “Child Placing Agency Inclusion Act,” but instead of encouraging child placement it would permit agencies to deny placement of children into LGBT households.
The new law allows child placement agencies, which often are religious-affiliated groups, such as Catholic adoption agencies, to deny placement in LGBT-headed homes.
According to AL.com, Ivey said she signed HB24 into law to ensure faith-adoption agencies can continue to work in the state.
“I ultimately signed House Bill 24 because it ensures hundreds of children can continue to find ‘forever homes’ through religiously affiliated adoption agencies,” Ivey reportedly said. “This bill is not about discrimination, but instead protects the ability of religious agencies to place vulnerable children in a permanent home.”
The bill was approved by the Senate on Wednesday by a 23-9 vote and by the House in March by a 60-14 vote. After Senate passage of HB24, the House gave final approval of the measure by a vote of 87-0, with six abstentions, to concur with a change made by the upper chamber of the legislature.
Ivey’s signature was expected. Eileen Jones, an Ivey spokesperson, told the Washington Blade last month her boss “plans to sign it pending a legal review.”
Kasey Suffredini, chief programs officer for Freedom for All Americans, was among those who criticized Ivey for signing the bill in a statement.
“The first priority of lawmakers should be the safety and wellbeing of children, especially those who are in need of safe and loving homes,” Suffredini said. “It is shameful that Gov. Ivey and lawmakers in Alabama would jeopardize those chances in order to advance discrimination against LGBT people.”
Also criticizing Ivey was Alex Smith, board chair of Equality Alabama, who said in a statement the governor was breaking her promise to usher in a new style of government after succeeding former Gov. Robert Bentley following his resignation amid scandal.
“When she was sworn in as governor, Kay Ivey promised her administration would be a breath of a fresh air from the scandals of the Bentley era, and we hoped she wouldn’t start her administration by approving shameful discriminatory legislation that ultimately does the most harm to children looking for loving homes,” Smith said. “Unfortunately, Gov. Ivey put special interests ahead of the welfare of Alabama children.”
In Tennessee, Gov. Bill Haslam signed into law on Friday House Bill 1111, which requires undefined words in Tennessee state law, such as gender pronouns, be enforced under their “natural” meaning. That could set up the state for conflict with the U.S. Supreme Court decision in favor of same-sex marriage nationwide if Tennessee implements a new law to deny benefits to same-sex couples.
In a statement defending his decision to sign the law, Haslam was consistent with principles on which the judiciary rely, denying the measure would conflict with the Obergefell decision.
“The language of this bill is for a general definitions section of the Tennessee code, which defines ‘road’ and ‘sheriff,’ among other common terms,” Haslam said. “For at least 150 years, courts including the Tennessee Supreme Court and United States Supreme Court have looked to a word’s natural and ordinary meaning when deciding cases. In reviewing this bill, I do not believe the legislation accomplishes anything that isn’t already relied upon by the courts, even after the U.S. Supreme Court’s Obergefell decision in 2015.”
The legislation, sponsored by Sen. John Stevens (R-Huntingdon) and Rep. Andrew Farmer (R-Sevierville), was passed in the House by a vote of 70-23 and the Senate by a vote of 23-6.
Sarah Warbelow, legal director for the Human Rights Campaign, said despite Haslam’s assurance the new law would have a negative impact on LGBT families in Tennessee.
“Gov. Haslam has chosen to put pure politics ahead of Tennessee’s women and LGBTQ people,” Warbelow said. “This draconian measure will open the state up to many expensive legal challenges and divert state resources to defending an unnecessary, unconstitutional measure. The Governor should be ready to answer for the fallout signing this bill will cause.”
It’s not the first time Haslam has signed into law an anti-LGBT measure. Last year, the governor signed Senate Bill 1556, which provides immunity under state law to counselors who object to care based on “sincerely held principles,” including refusal to treat patients based on their sexual orientation or gender identity.
Zeke Stokes, vice president of programs for GLAAD, said in a statement Haslam opened up the floodgates for discrimination by signing HB 1111 into law.
“By the stroke of a pen, Gov. Haslam has now placed the future of the state’s economy and the well-being of the LGBTQ community in jeopardy,” Stokes said. “HB 1111 has the potential to undermine marriages between LGBTQ couples, nullify a transgender person’s true identity under law, and put LGBTQ families at risk. This sets a dangerous precedent for how the LGBTQ community is treated in Tennessee moving forward.”
U.S. Military/Pentagon
Federal appeals court rules White House illegally banned trans troops
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth says Pentagon will appeal to SCOTUS
A panel of federal appeals court judges ruled that President Donald Trump’s policy banning transgender troops likely violates their constitutional rights.
The three-judge panel from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled 2-1 that Trump’s Executive Order 14183, also known as “Prioritizing Military Excellence and Readiness,” was created with the intent to exclude people from the military based on their gender identity.
The policy argues that trans people are inherently incapable of meeting the military’s “high standards of readiness, lethality, cohesion, honesty, humility, uniformity, and integrity,” citing a history of or signs of gender dysphoria as the cause. According to the Defense Department, this creates “medical, surgical, and mental health constraints on [an] individual.”
The policy states that, regardless of the physical or intellectual capabilities of each applicant, it views trans military applicants as a monolith, considering them less qualified than their cisgender peers.
Despite the panel’s majority opinion issued on Monday, the first day of Pride Month, the ban remains in effect. The U.S. Supreme Court allowed the Pentagon to enforce the policy last year and will continue to allow it to remain in place as litigation proceeds.
The panel’s new ruling will prevent the military from discharging current service members named in the lawsuit, but it does not allow new transrecruits to join.
The policy “appears to be driven by the bare desire to harm a politically unpopular group: persons who identify as transgender,” Judge Robert Wilkins, a Democratic appointee of President Barack Obama wrote for the majority.
Judge Justin Walker, the author of the dissenting opinion and a Republican Trump appointee, argued that the authority to determine military policy does not rest with the courts. Instead, he wrote, the Constitution grants that power to Congress through legislation and to the president as commander in chief of the armed forces.
“We have neither the expertise nor the authority to decide whether the military can exclude the plaintiffs from its ranks. The Constitution assigns that authority to Congress and the commander-in-chief,” Walker wrote.
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth indicated that an appeal is in the works, posting, “See you at SCOTUS” on X on Monday in response to the ruling.
Jennifer Levi, senior director of transgender and queer rights at GLAD Law, which has led the litigation since last November, applauded the decision.
“Today’s decision is a powerful vindication of the plaintiffs’ extraordinary courage and unwavering commitment to their country,” Levi said.
The Washington Blade spoke with Second Lt. Nicolas (Nic) Talbott of the U.S. Army, the lead plaintiff in the case, and Levi from GLAD Law back in November.
While discussing the case and his experiences as a trans service member, Talbott said his identity is an asset rather than a hindrance, particularly when it comes to identifying problems and finding solutions, regardless of what others may think or say.
“Being transgender is not some sad thing that people go through,” Talbott told the Blade. “This is something that has taken years and years and years of dedication and discipline and research and ups and downs to get to the point where I am today … my ability to transition was essential to getting me to that point where I am today.”
He also discussed the impact of removing qualified and dedicated service members from the military, arguing that the consequences will be felt long after Trump leaves office.
“When we’re losing thousands of those qualified, experienced individuals … those are seats that are not just going to be able to be filled by anybody,” he said. “[That’s] military training that’s not going to be able to be replaced for years and years to come.”
“Every person who puts on the uniform is expected to make a tremendous amount of sacrifice,” Talbott said. “Who I am under this uniform should have no bearing on that … We shouldn’t be picking and choosing which veterans are worthy of our thanks on that day.”
Levi characterized the policy as overtly cruel and legally indefensible to the Blade.
“This policy and its rollout is even more cruel than the first in a number of ways,” Levi explained. “For one, the policy itself says that transgender people are dishonest, untrustworthy and undisciplined, which is deeply offensive and degrading and demeaning.”
She also argued that the administration’s cost justification is flawed, saying that removing and replacing trans service members is more expensive than retaining them.
“There’s no legitimate justification relating to cost … it is far more expensive to both purge the military of people who are serving and also to replace people … than to provide the minuscule amount of costs for medications other service members routinely get.”
National
Results from key Tuesday primary races
State officials in California had not called the governor’s race as of Wednesday morning but Republican Steve Hilton and Democrat Xavier Becerra appear likely to advance to the general election.
The race for governor has been scrambled several times after Kamala Harris opted not to run, Rep. Eric Swalwell dropped out after sexual misconduct allegations surfaced, and Rep. Katie Porter’s campaign fizzled. Becerra would be the state’s first Latino governor since 1875 if elected. Hilton was endorsed by President Trump.
In the Los Angeles mayor’s race, the AP declared that incumbent Mayor Karen Bass will advance to the Nov. 3 runoff while former reality TV star Spencer Pratt and LA Council member Nithya Raman were competing for second place. California is notoriously slow in counting ballots and only about half of the results were available by Wednesday morning.
In San Francisco, Democratic State Sen. Scott Wiener advanced to the general election in November, besting Supervisor Connie Chan, who was endorsed by House Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi. Pelosi is retiring from Congress after nearly 40 years in the House.
In Iowa, Democratic state Rep. Josh Turek won the primary for an open U.S. Senate seat, defeating state Sen. Zach Wahls. Turek will face Rep. Ashley Hinson, who won the GOP primary with President Donald Trump’s endorsement, in the general election.
The Iowa seat is open because Sen. Joni Ernst (R) decided not to seek re-election. The primary was closely watched by LGBTQ advocates because Wahls rose to national prominence after a speech he made defending marriage equality went viral in 2011. Wahls was raised by a lesbian couple.
National
White House Correspondents’ Dinner rescheduled after shooting
‘We will not allow an act of violence to have the last word’
The White House Correspondents’ Association announced on Tuesday that it has rescheduled its annual dinner for July 24 after the April event was halted when gunshots rang out at the Washington Hilton.
Cole Allen, 31, is charged with the attempted assassination of President Trump, who was in the ballroom at the time of the incident. One Secret Service officer was wounded in the attack. Officers stopped Allen before he could enter the ballroom where 2,500 journalists and politicos were having dinner and waiting for Trump to speak. It was Trump’s first time attending as president.
“We will not allow an act of violence to have the last word, especially during a year when we are reflecting on the 250th anniversary of America and everything we stand for,” said WHCA President Weijia Jiang in a statement to members.
She did not announce further details, including venue and ticketing.
Washington Blade White House reporter Joe Reberkenny was in the audience when shots were fired and reported live on social media from the scene.
This post will be updated as more details are announced.
