Politics
State legislatures wrap, leaving terror in their wake
‘It’s hard to not be alarmed about the direction that this is all heading’
Conservative state legislatures from Florida to Idaho, have finished or will soon finish their business, leaving transgender Americans and their loved ones reeling from the onslaught of attacks against them.
Between 400 and 600 bills were introduced since January that target LGBTQ folks, disproportionately transgender kids – a figure that has often been cited by LGBTQ groups and elected Democrats.
What is often lost in this accounting, however, is how harmful the legislation is (or will be, in the case of so many bills that have yet to take effect), because for those who are directly targeted by the ceaseless legislative and rhetorical attacks, they are hardly an abstraction.
On Monday, Oklahoma became the 16th state to ban guideline-directed best practices healthcare interventions for the treatment of gender dysphoria in minors and the fourth state to make it a felony for providers to administer that care to their patients.
Then, on Tuesday, Montana became the 17th state, having just evicted duly elected state Rep. Zooey Zephyr from the chamber because, in her words, “I dared to give voice to the values and needs of transgender people like myself.”
In March, Kentucky passed what was then deemed “the worst anti-trans bill in the nation,” a healthcare ban augmented by language pulled from Florida’s so-called “Don’t Say Gay” law, which criminalizes discussion of sexual orientation or gender identity in schools.
The following month, just across the border, the torch was passed to Missouri, whose Republican Attorney General Andrew Bailey issued an emergency rule prohibiting gender affirming care for youth as well as adults and then published a form allowing citizens to formally record complaints about “a gender transition” they have “experienced or observed.”
Powerful conservative Christian advocacy groups like the Alliance Defending Freedom have lobbied for anti-LGBTQ bills and defended them from legal challenges. The organization has backed anti-trans measures from restrictions on access to gender affirming care to “Don’t Say Gay” laws.
For trans people, the prospect of having to flee their home states “doesn’t feel theoretical anymore,” Ari Drennen, LGBTQ program director for Media Matters for America, told the Washington Blade.
“The thing is,” she said, “I feel like we got there a while ago, and I just kind of adjusted, and now it’s like this weird world where I have multiple adult friends who are leaving multiple states for their own safety.”
“It’s hard to keep perspective of just how bad it’s gotten and just how quickly,” Drennen said.
She added the recent polling data, which indicates “most voters do not think that this is a good use of the government’s time and energy” offers cold comfort because “when that doesn’t seem to stop them, it almost makes it scarier.”
Drennen said the reality for so many of these Republican legislators is “they are just so genuinely opposed to the existence of trans people” that they will continue apace with these legislative crusades, political consequences be damned.
Another concern, often overlooked, is the escalation of transphobic rhetoric that abets the work of anti-trans GOP legislatures and to some extent makes their goals more reachable.
“You can look at The Daily Wire’s Michael Knowles giving his big speech at CPAC,” Drennen said, in which he argued “that transgenderism must be eradicated from public life entirely.”
“Those were his exact words,” she said, and “what he’s saying there is that trans people should not be in public, really under any circumstances, and I think that’s where a lot of the right wing media has gotten.”
“This has escalated very quickly in a couple of years from, ‘oh, well, you know, we just have some concerns about the fairness of trans people who are competing in sports,’ to multiple states passing bathroom bills or considering bathroom bills, multiple states expanding what kinds of gender affirming care they’re considering trying to take off the table,” Drennen said.
“And it’s hard to not be alarmed about the direction that this is all heading,” she said.
At this juncture, according to the ACLU:
- Anti-LGBTQ bills can be divided into seven categories: Healthcare (e.g., bans on gender affirming care); public accommodations (e.g., laws prohibiting trans people from using restrooms and facilities consistent with their gender identity); schools and education (e.g., “Don’t Say Gay” laws, bans prohibiting trans student athletes from competing in sports); free speech and expression (e.g., restrictions on drag performances, book bans); accurate IDs (e.g., laws prohibiting trans people from obtaining documents that reflect their gender identity); civil rights (e.g., measures to allow discrimination against LGBTQ people); and other (e.g., Alabama’s proposed bill to define “woman” based on sex characteristics at birth).
- Fifteen states have introduced more than 10 anti-LGBTQ bills: Arizona, North Dakota, Kansas, Oklahoma, Texas, Iowa, Missouri, Mississippi, Indiana, Kentucky, Tennessee, West Virginia, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Florida.
- Four states and the District of Columbia have not introduced any anti-LGBTQ bills: Pennsylvania, Delaware, Illinois, and Wisconsin.
- 318 anti-LGBTQ bills are now advancing through state legislatures. Forty-five have been signed into law; 105 have been defeated.
The White House
HRC files class action over federal ban on gender-affirming care coverage
Lawsuit filed Monday challenges White House effort to restrict care
The Human Rights Campaign Foundation, the nonprofit sister organization to the largest LGBTQ human rights lobbying and advocacy organization in the U.S., along with law firms Correia & Puth and Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll, filed a class action lawsuit against the government as it attempts to restrict gender-affirming healthcare for federal employees.
The suit, filed on Monday, alleges that the Office of Personnel Management, run by Trump appointee Scott Kupor, is discriminating against LGBTQ federal employees (and their families and retired employees) by prohibiting health insurance coverage for gender-affirming care under the Federal Employees Health Benefits and Postal Service Health Benefits plans. There are five plaintiffs named in the complaint, but it extends to others who have those healthcare plans.
The document asserts that OPM’s prohibition on coverage for “gender transition” care in the FEHB and PSHB programs violates Title VII, the federal law that prohibits discrimination based on sex, race, color, religion, or national origin.
The policy, which was implemented on Jan. 1 following the 2025 issuing of Program Carrier Letter, mandated that insurance providers in these programs deny any coverage for gender-affirming care. In February, HRC filed a federal complaint with OPM over the change in healthcare policy, which was ultimately passed to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission for review. That complaint is now an officially filed class action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.
Research from the Williams Institute at UCLA Law, a think tank that collects data and conducts research on issues related to sexual orientation and gender identity, indicates that this policy denying gender-affirming care will impact healthcare access for at least 39,400 current and former federal employees and their dependents.
Human Rights Campaign President Kelley Robinson released a statement following the lawsuit’s filing.
“Our message to the Trump administration is simple: we’ll see you in court,” said Robinson. “Healthcare access should never be weaponized to advance discrimination — and the denial of coverage for critical healthcare based simply on who you are blatantly violates the rights of all of us.”
Gender-affirming care has been under constant attack by the Trump-Vance administration since its return to the White House, despite the practice being considered as extensively evidence-based but also supported by nearly every major medical organization. This type of care is provided to all people—not just transgender people—and includes things such as social affirmation, including using correct names and pronouns and wearing clothing that matches a person’s gender identity; mental health support, such as counseling to reduce depression and anxiety; and, in some cases, medical interventions such as reversible puberty blockers or hormone therapy when deemed medically appropriate.
“Federal employees have been through the wringer with the Trump administration,” said Cathy Harris, partner at Correia & Puth. “We draw the line at blatant discrimination to deny healthcare to our nation’s dedicated civil servants.”
“This odious policy is the latest example of the Trump administration’s obsession with targeting transgender people, using shameful and cruel tactics to threaten their employment, their health, and the well-being of themselves and their families,” Robinson added. “OPM’s actions will not go unchallenged, and we’ll continue to fight so that federal employees and their families receive the dignity they deserve.”
This is not the first time the White House has directly attacked gender-affirming care.
In January 2025, the administration issued Executive Order 14187, titled “Protecting Children from Chemical and Surgical Mutilation.” The order directs federal agencies to restrict gender-affirming medical care — including puberty blockers, hormone therapy, and surgeries — for individuals under the age of 19.
For more information on how to get involved with the lawsuit, visit hrc.org.
Politics
Buttigieg indicates he may run for president in 2028
Former Transportation Secretary was in Biden-Harris administration’s Cabinet
Former Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg told a podcaster he is considering throwing his hat in the ring for president once again.
“I don’t know,” Buttigieg told Steven Bartlett, the British host of The Diary of a CEO, the most popular top business and tech podcast on Spotify, which aired Monday. “I think I’m more inclined than not, but there’s so much we don’t know.”
“There’s so much I don’t even know about what’s going to happen this year, let alone … what we need to know later,” he added.
Buttigieg is no stranger to running for the Oval Office.
In 2019, the former South Bend, Ind., mayor was a serious contender in the Democratic primary for the 2020 presidential election but ultimately ended his campaign and endorsed Joe Biden.
In May, an Emerson College Polling survey found Buttigieg at the top of the list of potential presidential contenders, leading California Gov. Gavin Newsom, New York Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, former Vice President Kamala Harris, and others.
In addition to discussing his future in federal politics, Buttigieg also discussed President Donald Trump’s handling of the Iran war — which reached its 5-month mark two weeks ago — the changing landscape of U.S. jobs due to the rise of artificial intelligence, and the growing national debt, all issues he could face if he ultimately returns to the White House.
Following his 2020 presidential campaign, Buttigieg gained prominence within the Democratic Party, eventually leading to his confirmation as Transportation Secretary. In February 2021, he became the first openly gay Cabinet member to be confirmed by the U.S. Senate.
In addition to his experience as an elected official, the 44-year-old served as a Navy intelligence officer in the reserves from 2009-2017, including a seven-month deployment to Afghanistan in 2014. Buttigieg came out as gay in 2015 and later married his husband, Chasten Glezman, in 2018. The couple now has two children: twins.
Buttigieg also has an extensive educational background.
He graduated from Harvard University with a bachelor’s degree in history and literature and later became a Rhodes Scholar, attending the University of Oxford, where he earned a bachelor’s degree in philosophy, politics, and economics.
This is not the first time Buttigieg has made headlines this year.
In June, he went public about being falsely accused of posing a threat to his children’s safety. An anonymous police report claimed he was a danger to his 4-year-old twins and was not allowed to be with them until after police interviews were conducted.
The police report was later determined to be false. The Washington Blade reached out to the Michigan State Police to ask what course of action, if any, would be taken against the woman who filed the false report, but the agency did not answer the question.
The Blade reached out to Buttigieg’s team for comment on his potential 2028 presidential bid, but did not hear back before publication.
Congress
House blocks effort to codify transgender servicemember ban into law
Lawmakers approved two anti-trans NDAA amendments
The U.S. House of Representatives on Tuesday rejected an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act that would have codified a ban transgender servicemembers in the military.
The bipartisan vote was 212-217.
The NDAA is for the 2027 fiscal year and sets policies for the Defense Department programs and activities and the national security programs of the Department of Energy.
U.S. Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-Colo.) proposed the amendment on July 21. It stated that all personnel are required to serve in accordance with their biological sex, citing military readiness and discipline.
Human Rights Campaign Senior Director of Government Affairs Jennifer Pike Bailey stated that she is grateful for the bipartisan vote that rejected President Donald Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s “dangerous and discriminatory policy that has kicked brave transgender servicemembers out of the military and weakened our national security.”
“Everyone who meets the same rigorous standards should be able to serve their country. We should honor that patriotism, particularly in this moment where we are witnessing brave servicemembers making the ultimate sacrifice for our country, instead of ending their careers and politicizing their existence. We’re grateful that a permanent extension of this ban failed, and we will keep fighting to reverse this senseless policy,” Bailey said.
Mark Takano, chair of the Congressional Equality Caucus, stated that he and his members put in countless hours of work to kill the amendment.
“When Americans know they or their families are going to be targeted by or not supported by the military, that leads them to avoid signing up to serve or staying in the service — making it harder to keep the ranks of the armed services full and our nation safe. My colleagues in the Equality Caucus and I will continue working to prevent these attacks on our servicemembers and their families from becoming law,” Takano said.
According to the Congressional Equality Caucus, two other bills could potentially be passed that would also target the transgender community, both of which were proposed by U.S. Rep. Nancy Mace (R-S.C.).
The first was a bill that would have prohibited gender-related medical care under TRICARE and to prevent TRICARE from covering certain gender-related medical procedures and treatments, which was approved in a vote of 219-208.
The second was a bill that would have prohibited male participation in female sports at DoDEA schools. DoDEA schools are Department of Defense Dependents Schools, which is a network of primary and secondary schools.
The amendment was approved in a vote of 221-203.
-
Michigan5 days agoProgressives score victory as El-Sayed wins Mich. Senate primary
-
Virginia5 days agoDoug Ollivant to face Eugene Vindman in Va. 7th Congressional District
-
District of Columbia5 days agoLGBTQ advocates optimistic about D.C.’s expected new mayor
-
Opinions4 days agoContinue to engage in community after Pride month
