National
Efforts to pass federal LGBTQ protections boosted with $6.5 million donation
Donations seek to duplicate success of marriage-equality movement


Efforts to pass a measure expanding the prohibition on discrimination against LGBTQ people under federal law have gotten a big boost with a nearly $6.5 million donation from a coalition of non-profits for an education campaign, the Washington Blade has learned exclusively.
The San Francisco-based Evelyn & Walter Haas, Jr. Fund coordinated the grants, which seek to duplicate the success of the movement that achieved same-sex marriage nationwide to enact federal non-discrimination protections this year.
The contributions are intended “to educate the public and policymakers about the need for a federal response to anti-LGBTQ discrimination,” according to a statement.
“It’s long past time for the federal government to respond to the profound harms caused by pervasive discrimination against LGBT people,” Cathy Cha, CEO of the Evelyn and Walter Haas, Jr. Fund said in a statement.
The Evelyn and Walter Haas, Jr. Fund for more than two decades has been at the forefront of supporting LGBTQ rights, including non-discrimination protections. It was the first foundation to embrace same-sex marriage as a priority and contributed more than $39 million to the marriage equality movement, according to a statement.
Other groups that have contributed to the $6.5 million in donations are the Gill Foundation, the Ford Foundation, Horizons Foundation, the Overbrook Foundation, the Pride Foundation and other philanthropic institutions. The contribution builds on the $1 million the Gill Foundation gave in support at the start of this year.
Scott Miller, co-chair of the Gill Foundation, said in a statement “the funders and advocates who helped win the right to marry for LGBTQ people have joined forces again and expanded our coalition in pursuit of equality for all Americans.”
“This alliance speaks to the unprecedented opportunity – and the long overdue need – to make sure everyone in this country is equal under the law,” Miller added.
The donations are announced as LGBTQ rights supporters are seeking to pass the Equality Act in Congress. The measure has cleared the House, but faces an uncertain future in the U.S. Senate, where 10 Republicans would be needed to overcome a filibuster.
The contributions, however, aren’t directed at passing the Equality Act per se because the contributors are 501(c)3 tax-exempt foundations and are unable to endorse any particular piece of legislation. The campaign is more generally geared toward supporting a solution for non-discrimination protections at the federal level.
Groups specifically seeking to pass the Equality Act, however, praised the $6.5 million as a welcome addition to the effort.
Kasey Suffredini, CEO of Freedom for All Americans, said in a statement the LGBTQ community is “closer than it has ever been to completing its nearly 50-year pursuit of nationwide nondiscrimination protections for all LGBTQ people.”
“Since the first federal non-discrimination measure was introduced in Congress in 1974, the generous contributions of foundations and major donors have powered our ability to show our fellow Americans who we are and challenges we face, opening hearts and changing minds in the process,” Suffredini said. “With a very short window to seize this once-in-a-generation opportunity, we are grateful again to these philanthropists for rising to the moment to carry our community over the finish line.”
In terms of where the money is going exactly, one-third of the Fund’s grants have been made to national organizations, including $800,000 to Freedom for All Americans Education Fund.
Additionally, money will go toward “empowering constituents to have conversations with lawmakers in more than 12 states, including Florida, Georgia, North Carolina, Ohio and Texas,” according to a statement. State groups are seen as key in the effort to convince moderate senators to support an LGBTQ non-discrimination measure.
Tyler Deaton, senior adviser of the American Unity Fund, echoed the praise for the donations. In addition to supporting the Equality Act, his organization is pushing for the Fairness for All Act, the Republican compromise measure for LGBTQ rights and religious freedom.
“This is the best moment we’ve ever had to win full freedom for LGBTQ Americans, and we can win as long as we come together with allies all across the political spectrum and respectfully address everyone’s reasonable concerns,” Deaton said.
New York
Men convicted of murdering two men in NYC gay bar drugging scheme sentenced
One of the victims, John Umberger, was D.C. political consultant

A New York judge on Wednesday sentenced three men convicted of killing a D.C. political consultant and another man who they targeted at gay bars in Manhattan.
NBC New York notes a jury in February convicted Jayqwan Hamilton, Jacob Barroso, and Robert DeMaio of murder, robbery, and conspiracy in relation to druggings and robberies that targeted gay bars in Manhattan from March 2021 to June 2022.
John Umberger, a 33-year-old political consultant from D.C., and Julio Ramirez, a 25-year-old social worker, died. Prosecutors said Hamilton, Barroso, and DeMaio targeted three other men at gay bars.
The jury convicted Hamilton and DeMaio of murdering Umberger. State Supreme Court Judge Felicia Mennin sentenced Hamilton and DeMaio to 40 years to life in prison.
Barroso, who was convicted of killing Ramirez, received a 20 years to life sentence.
National
Medical groups file lawsuit over Trump deletion of health information
Crucial datasets included LGBTQ, HIV resources

Nine private medical and public health advocacy organizations, including two from D.C., filed a lawsuit on May 20 in federal court in Seattle challenging what it calls the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’s illegal deletion of dozens or more of its webpages containing health related information, including HIV information.
The lawsuit, filed in the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington, names as defendants Robert F. Kennedy Jr., secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and HHS itself, and several agencies operating under HHS and its directors, including the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the National Institutes of Health, and the Food and Drug Administration.
“This action challenges the widespread deletion of public health resources from federal agencies,” the lawsuit states. “Dozens (if not more) of taxpayer-funded webpages, databases, and other crucial resources have vanished since January 20, 2025, leaving doctors, nurses, researchers, and the public scrambling for information,” it says.
“These actions have undermined the longstanding, congressionally mandated regime; irreparably harmed Plaintiffs and others who rely on these federal resources; and put the nation’s public health infrastructure in unnecessary jeopardy,” the lawsuit continues.
It adds, “The removal of public health resources was apparently prompted by two recent executive orders – one focused on ‘gender ideology’ and the other targeting diversity, equity, and inclusion (‘DEI’) programs. Defendants implemented these executive orders in a haphazard manner that resulted in the deletion (inadvertent or otherwise) of health-related websites and databases, including information related to pregnancy risks, public health datasets, information about opioid-use disorder, and many other valuable resources.”
The lawsuit does not mention that it was President Donald Trump who issued the two executive orders in question.
A White House spokesperson couldn’t immediately be reached for comment on the lawsuit.
While not mentioning Trump by name, the lawsuit names as defendants in addition to HHS Secretary Robert Kennedy Jr., Matthew Buzzelli, acting director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; Jay Bhattacharya, director of the National Institutes of Health; Martin Makary, commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration; Thomas Engels, administrator of the Health Resources and Services Administration; and Charles Ezell, acting director of the Office of Personnel Management.
The 44-page lawsuit complaint includes an addendum with a chart showing the titles or descriptions of 49 “affected resource” website pages that it says were deleted because of the executive orders. The chart shows that just four of the sites were restored after initially being deleted.
Of the 49 sites, 15 addressed LGBTQ-related health issues and six others addressed HIV issues, according to the chart.
“The unannounced and unprecedented deletion of these federal webpages and datasets came as a shock to the medical and scientific communities, which had come to rely on them to monitor and respond to disease outbreaks, assist physicians and other clinicians in daily care, and inform the public about a wide range of healthcare issues,” the lawsuit states.
“Health professionals, nonprofit organizations, and state and local authorities used the websites and datasets daily in care for their patients, to provide resources to their communities, and promote public health,” it says.
Jose Zuniga, president and CEO of the International Association of Providers of AIDS Care (IAPAC), one of the organizations that signed on as a plaintiff in the lawsuit, said in a statement that the deleted information from the HHS websites “includes essential information about LGBTQ+ health, gender and reproductive rights, clinical trial data, Mpox and other vaccine guidance and HIV prevention resources.”
Zuniga added, “IAPAC champions evidence-based, data-informed HIV responses and we reject ideologically driven efforts that undermine public health and erase marginalized communities.”
Lisa Amore, a spokesperson for Whitman-Walker Health, D.C.’s largest LGBTQ supportive health services provider, also expressed concern about the potential impact of the HHS website deletions.
“As the region’s leader in HIV care and prevention, Whitman-Walker Health relies on scientific data to help us drive our resources and measure our successes,” Amore said in response to a request for comment from the Washington Blade.
“The District of Columbia has made great strides in the fight against HIV,” Amore said. “But the removal of public facing information from the HHS website makes our collective work much harder and will set HIV care and prevention backward,” she said.
The lawsuit calls on the court to issue a declaratory judgement that the “deletion of public health webpages and resources is unlawful and invalid” and to issue a preliminary or permanent injunction ordering government officials named as defendants in the lawsuit “to restore the public health webpages and resources that have been deleted and to maintain their web domains in accordance with their statutory duties.”
It also calls on the court to require defendant government officials to “file a status report with the Court within twenty-four hours of entry of a preliminary injunction, and at regular intervals, thereafter, confirming compliance with these orders.”
The health organizations that joined the lawsuit as plaintiffs include the Washington State Medical Association, Washington State Nurses Association, Washington Chapter of the American Academy of Pediatrics, Academy Health, Association of Nurses in AIDS Care, Fast-Track Cities Institute, International Association of Providers of AIDS Care, National LGBT Cancer Network, and Vermont Medical Society.
The Fast-Track Cities Institute and International Association of Providers of AIDS Care are based in D.C.
U.S. Federal Courts
Federal judge scraps trans-inclusive workplace discrimination protections
Ruling appears to contradict US Supreme Court precedent

Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas has struck down guidelines by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission designed to protect against workplace harassment based on gender identity and sexual orientation.
The EEOC in April 2024 updated its guidelines to comply with the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in Bostock v. Clayton County (2020), which determined that discrimination against transgender people constituted sex-based discrimination as proscribed under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
To ensure compliance with the law, the agency recommended that employers honor their employees’ preferred pronouns while granting them access to bathrooms and allowing them to wear dress code-compliant clothing that aligns with their gender identities.
While the the guidelines are not legally binding, Kacsmaryk ruled that their issuance created “mandatory standards” exceeding the EEOC’s statutory authority that were “inconsistent with the text, history, and tradition of Title VII and recent Supreme Court precedent.”
“Title VII does not require employers or courts to blind themselves to the biological differences between men and women,” he wrote in the opinion.
The case, which was brought by the conservative think tank behind Project 2025, the Heritage Foundation, presents the greatest setback for LGBTQ inclusive workplace protections since President Donald Trump’s issuance of an executive order on the first day of his second term directing U.S. federal agencies to recognize only two genders as determined by birth sex.
Last month, top Democrats from both chambers of Congress reintroduced the Equality Act, which would codify LGBTQ-inclusive protections against discrimination into federal law, covering employment as well as areas like housing and jury service.