National
Commerce Dept. omits, restores LGBT people in non-discrimination policy
Trump admin pledges to restore missing protections in future update


Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross omitted LGBT workers from his EEO policy statement. (Photo via wikimedia)
Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross issued a new non-discrimination policy this week omitting explicit assurances LGBT workers won’t face discrimination in his department, prompting an outcry that resulted in an updated version of the document making clear the prohibition on anti-LGBT discrimination.
The 2017 Secretarial Policy Statement on Equal Employment Opportunity initially found on the Commerce Department’s website declares it won’t tolerate discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age or disability. Omitted from the policy: sexual orientation and gender identity — two categories that were included in the policy under the Obama administration.
According to a report in Buzzfeed, the Ross policy statement was circulated among department staff on Thursday. The new policy statement was posted in the last 10 days, Buzzfeed reports, because an archived view of the website from June 6 reveals the 2016 LGBT-inclusive statement was included. The Commerce Department employs nearly 47,000 workers, according to its website.
David Stacy, the Human Rights Campaign’s government affairs director, said in a statement the omission represents “the Trump/Pence Administration actively seeking to undermine rights for LGBTQ people.”
“The Commerce Department’s EEO statement is meant to inform workers and applicants about their legal protections,” Stacy said. “Cutting specific mention of sexual orientation and gender identity protections is a slap in the face to LGBTQ federal employees who proudly serve at the Department of Commerce and sadly signals that this administration does not value them.”
After initial media reports and outcry over the omission, the Commerce Department sent out a new version of the non-discrimination policy Friday with sexual orientation and gender identity specifically included.
A Commerce Department spokesperson said the omission was “never intended to change the policy or exclude any protected categories” and insisted the department doesn’t discriminate against LGBT people.
“I hope we can help people understand that the impression this whole situation gave people is really not who Secretary Ross is,” the spokesperson said. “As soon as this was brought to his attention, he was appalled and directed immediate action be taken to rectify any misconceptions. From his first day at Commerce, Secretary Ross has made clear that he will tolerate no bias or discrimination of any sort.”
Even if the Commerce Department no longer prohibited discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity, LGBT workers there would still have protections under the executive order signed by President Clinton barring anti-gay discrimination in the federal workforce, which President Obama expanded to include transgender people.
LGBT workers at the Commerce Department may also find restitution for claims of discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights of 1964. The law contains no explicit prohibition on anti-LGBT discrimination, but the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and a growing number of courts have determined the prohibition on sex discrimination under the law applies to LGBT people.
House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) decried the Commerce Department omission as “appalling” in a statement and was among those who called on Ross to reinstate sexual orientation and gender identity in the policy.
“While LGBT employees of the Department remain protected under the government-wide policy instituted by former President Obama, this decision by Secretary Ross sends a signal that LGBT Americans are not welcome at the department he leads,” Hoyer said. “In addition to the injustice of his move, the Secretary ought to reflect on the role of the LGBT community in our economy and the importance of LGBT businesspeople in creating jobs and expanding trade to benefit our country and its workers.”
Joel Kasnetz, a spokesperson for the Democratic National Committee, also criticized the Trump administration for the LGBT omission and said the restoration of the language is an insufficient remedy.
“You can’t un-ring a bell,” Kasnetz said. “By trying to erase LGBTQ people from the Commerce Department’s nondiscrimination policy, the Trump administration sent a crystal clear message to LGBTQ Americans: ‘You’re not welcome here.’”
The Commerce Department didn’t respond to a follow-up inquiry on why sexual orientation and gender identity were excluded from the policy in the first place.
A White House official deferred to the Commerce Department statement in response to inquiries on whether President Trump was OK with the omission and whether it was the result of an administration-wide directive. In January, the White House said Trump would leave in place Obama’s executive order barring anti-LGBT workplace discrimination among federal contractors.
U.S. Supreme Court
Supreme Court to consider bans on trans athletes in school sports
27 states have passed laws limiting participation in athletics programs

The U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday agreed to hear two cases involving transgender youth challenging bans prohibiting them from participating in school sports.
In Little v. Hecox, plaintiffs represented by the ACLU, Legal Voice, and the law firm Cooley are challenging Idaho’s 2020 ban, which requires sex testing to adjudicate questions of an athlete’s eligibility.
The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals described the process in a 2023 decision halting the policy’s enforcement pending an outcome in the litigation. The “sex dispute verification process, whereby any individual can ‘dispute’ the sex of any female student athlete in the state of Idaho,” the court wrote, would “require her to undergo intrusive medical procedures to verify her sex, including gynecological exams.”
In West Virginia v. B.P.J., Lambda Legal, the ACLU, the ACLU of West Virginia, and Cooley are representing a trans middle school student challenging the Mountain State’s 2021 ban on trans athletes.
The plaintiff was participating in cross country when the law was passed, taking puberty blockers that would have significantly reduced the chances that she could have a physiological advantage over cisgender peers.
“Like any other educational program, school athletic programs should be accessible for everyone regardless of their sex or transgender status,” said Joshua Block, senior counsel for the ACLU’s LGBTQ and HIV Project. “Trans kids play sports for the same reasons their peers do — to learn perseverance, dedication, teamwork, and to simply have fun with their friends,” Block said.
He added, “Categorically excluding kids from school sports just because they are transgender will only make our schools less safe and more hurtful places for all youth. We believe the lower courts were right to block these discriminatory laws, and we will continue to defend the freedom of all kids to play.”
“Our client just wants to play sports with her friends and peers,” said Lambda Legal Senior Counsel Tara Borelli. “Everyone understands the value of participating in team athletics, for fitness, leadership, socialization, and myriad other benefits.”
Borelli continued, “The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit last April issued a thoughtful and thorough ruling allowing B.P.J. to continue participating in track events. That well-reasoned decision should stand the test of time, and we stand ready to defend it.”
Shortly after taking control of both legislative chambers, Republican members of Congress tried — unsuccessfully — to pass a national ban like those now enforced in 27 states since 2020.
Federal Government
UPenn erases Lia Thomas’s records as part of settlement with White House
University agreed to ban trans women from women’s sports teams

In a settlement with the Trump-Vance administration announced on Tuesday, the University of Pennsylvania will ban transgender athletes from competing and erase swimming records set by transgender former student Lia Thomas.
The U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights found the university in violation of Title IX, the federal rights law barring sex based discrimination in educational institutions, by “permitting males to compete in women’s intercollegiate athletics and to occupy women-only intimate facilities.”
The statement issued by University of Pennsylvania President J. Larry Jameson highlighted how the law’s interpretation was changed substantially under President Donald Trump’s second term.
“The Department of Education OCR investigated the participation of one transgender athlete on the women’s swimming team three years ago, during the 2021-2022 swim season,” he wrote. “At that time, Penn was in compliance with NCAA eligibility rules and Title IX as then interpreted.”
Jameson continued, “Penn has always followed — and continues to follow — Title IX and the applicable policy of the NCAA regarding transgender athletes. NCAA eligibility rules changed in February 2025 with Executive Orders 14168 and 14201 and Penn will continue to adhere to these new rules.”
Writing that “we acknowledge that some student-athletes were disadvantaged by these rules” in place while Thomas was allowed to compete, the university president added, “We recognize this and will apologize to those who experienced a competitive disadvantage or experienced anxiety because of the policies in effect at the time.”
“Today’s resolution agreement with UPenn is yet another example of the Trump effect in action,” Education Secretary Linda McMahon said in a statement. “Thanks to the leadership of President Trump, UPenn has agreed both to apologize for its past Title IX violations and to ensure that women’s sports are protected at the university for future generations of female athletes.”
Under former President Joe Biden, the department’s Office of Civil Rights sought to protect against anti-LGBTQ discrimination in education, bringing investigations and enforcement actions in cases where school officials might, for example, require trans students to use restrooms and facilities consistent with their birth sex or fail to respond to peer harassment over their gender identity.
Much of the legal reasoning behind the Biden-Harris administration’s positions extended from the 2020 U.S. Supreme Court case Bostock v. Clayton County, which found that sex-based discrimination includes that which is based on sexual orientation or gender identity under Title VII rules covering employment practices.
The Trump-Vance administration last week put the state of California on notice that its trans athlete policies were, or once were, in violation of Title IX, which comes amid the ongoing battle with Maine over the same issue.
New York
Two teens shot steps from Stonewall Inn after NYC Pride parade
One of the victims remains in critical condition

On Sunday night, following the annual NYC Pride March, two girls were shot in Sheridan Square, feet away from the historic Stonewall Inn.
According to an NYPD report, the two girls, aged 16 and 17, were shot around 10:15 p.m. as Pride festivities began to wind down. The 16-year-old was struck in the head and, according to police sources, is said to be in critical condition, while the 17-year-old was said to be in stable condition.
The Washington Blade confirmed with the NYPD the details from the police reports and learned no arrests had been made as of noon Monday.
The shooting took place in the Greenwich Village neighborhood of Manhattan, mere feet away from the most famous gay bar in the city — if not the world — the Stonewall Inn. Earlier that day, hundreds of thousands of people marched down Christopher Street to celebrate 55 years of LGBTQ people standing up for their rights.
In June 1969, after police raided the Stonewall Inn, members of the LGBTQ community pushed back, sparking what became known as the Stonewall riots. Over the course of two days, LGBTQ New Yorkers protested the discriminatory policing of queer spaces across the city and mobilized to speak out — and throw bottles if need be — at officers attempting to suppress their existence.
The following year, LGBTQ people returned to the Stonewall Inn and marched through the same streets where queer New Yorkers had been arrested, marking the first “Gay Pride March” in history and declaring that LGBTQ people were not going anywhere.
New York State Assemblywoman Deborah Glick, whose district includes Greenwich Village, took to social media to comment on the shooting.
“After decades of peaceful Pride celebrations — this year gun fire and two people shot near the Stonewall Inn is a reminder that gun violence is everywhere,” the lesbian lawmaker said on X. “Guns are a problem despite the NRA BS.”
-
U.S. Supreme Court1 day ago
Supreme Court to consider bans on trans athletes in school sports
-
Out & About1 day ago
Celebrate the Fourth of July the gay way!
-
Maryland4 days ago
Silver Spring holds annual Pride In The Plaza
-
Opinions4 days ago
Supreme Court decision on opt outs for LGBTQ books in classrooms will likely accelerate censorship