Politics
First GOP debate sees abortion dominating other non-economic issues
LGBTQ comments largely focused on school policies and athletics
Among the non-economic issues discussed by the eight candidates who appeared on stage Wednesday night for the first Republican Party 2024 presidential primary debate, abortion loomed larger than other topics including LGBTQ rights.
The Fox News moderators asked each GOP hopeful to share their positions on a federal law governing access to the procedure, with only two – South Carolina’s U.S. Senator Tim Scott and former Vice President Mike Pence – pledging to support a 15-week ban.
“We cannot let states like California, New York, and Illinois have abortions on demand up until the day of birth,” said Scott, who called the 15-week limit the “minimum” restriction he would support.
The proposal is “an idea whose time has come,” Pence said, adding, “We appointed three conservatives to the Supreme Court who gave Americans a new beginning for the right to life,” a reference to last year’s Dobbs decision overturning the constitutional protections of Roe v. Wade.
Former President Donald Trump, who appointed those justices, did not attend the debate. The latest polls show he is leading the other candidates by a wide margin, with 56 percent support among likely Republican primary voters compared to 10 percent each for the candidates tied for second place, both of whom participated in the debate: Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis and entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy.
Hours before the event began, the South Carolina Supreme Court allowed the legislature’s six-week abortion ban to take effect. The state’s former Gov. Nikki Haley, who also served as U.N. ambassador under Trump, struck a more measured tone — asserting that she is “unapologetically pro-life” but lamenting that the High Court’s “unelected justices did not need to decide something this personal.”
Haley accused her rivals of misrepresenting the political challenges that would come with passage of a federal ban, which would require a 60-vote majority in the Senate that she stated is not a realistic expectation.
North Dakota Gov. Doug Burgum, who had signed a six-week abortion ban, came out against proposals for a federal prohibition by the Congress.
Also sharing the stage were former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie and former Arkansas Gov. Asa Hutchinson. The debate was moderated by Fox News hosts Bret Baier and Martha MacCallum.
Candidates who discussed LGBTQ matters focused on education policies
“In Florida, we eliminated critical race theory from our K-12 schools, we eliminated gender ideology from our K-12 schools,” DeSantis said. “We need education in this country, not indoctrination in this country.”
Haley again reiterated her opposition to allowing transgender girls to compete on girls’ sports teams, proclaiming that “biological boys don’t belong in locker rooms of any of our girls,” an issue that Fox host MacCallum noted, Haley had once called “the women’s issue of our time.”
“In North Dakota, we’ve made a priority of protecting women’s sports, and we’ve done that in our state,” Burgum said, referencing the anti-trans sports ban he signed in April. At the same time, he hedged that “the idea that every school district and state and every teacher is somehow indoctrinating people is just false.”
In his closing statements, Ramaswamy said “there are two genders,” along with other proclamations like “God is real,” “reverse racism is racism,” and “The nuclear family is the greatest form of governance known to man.”
Other references to LGBTQ issues were more ambiguous.
Haley, for instance, said “There’s a lot of crazy woke things happening in these schools,” arguing “We need transparency in the classroom because parents should never have to wonder what’s being said or taught to their children in the classroom.”
“If God made you a man, you play sports against men,” Scott said in his closing statement, a possible reference to policies allowing transgender student athletes to compete on teams consistent with their gender identities.
Responding to a question about the 91 felony counts against Trump, Scott addressed what he called “the weaponization of the Department of Justice against political opponents, but also against parents who show up at school board meetings,” adding, “They’re called, under this DOJ, ‘domestic terrorists.'”
Other elected Republicans including DeSantis have made similar claims over the past few years, beginning with the discovery of a one-page memo issued by Attorney General Merrick Garland in 2021, which concerned coordination with local law enforcement after widespread reports of threats by parents against school board members, administrators and teachers over COVID-19 policies.
DeSantis spokeswoman Christina Pushaw spoke out against the arrest of a parent for protesting “a Loudoun school’s coverup of his 14-year-old daughter’s sexual assault by a transgender classmate in her school bathroom,” an account later revealed to be untrue.
Ramaswamy
The only candidate on stage with no experience serving in government, Ramaswamy’s remarks often presented himself to be more conservative politically than his opponents.
“Let us be honest as Republicans, the climate change agenda is a hoax,” he said, later claiming that “fossil fuels are a requirement for prosperity.”
During an interview with right-wing pundit and former Fox News host Tucker Carlson that aired last week, Ramaswamy likened the beliefs by proponents of LGBTQ rights and climate change activists to the ideologies of people in religious cults, bent on effectuating “a broader vision that defines itself in opposition to the American vision, to the American way of life.”
Ramaswamy also distinguished himself as the only candidate on stage who pledged to pardon Trump if he is elected president. Others, by contrast, focused on leveling accusations about the weaponization of law enforcement against conservatives, arguing that Republicans should move on from the matters being litigated against the former president, including over his role in the January 6 insurrection, defending Pence for refusing to overturn the results of the 2020 election, or – in Christie’s case – asserting that “Whether or not you believe that criminal charges [against Trump] are right or wrong, the conduct is beneath the office of President of the United States.”
Baier noted Ramaswamy’s pledge to abolish federal administrative agencies including the U.S. Department of Education, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the U.S. Treasury Department’s Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the IRS, and the Department of Commerce.
In a possible reference to his pledge, Ramaswamy concluded his closing statement with the message that “There are three branches of government, not four. And the U.S. Constitution is the strongest guarantor of freedom in human history — that is what won us the American revolution, that is what will win us the revolution of 2024.”
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.
-
The White House5 days agoHRC files class action over federal ban on gender-affirming care coverage
-
National5 days agoHRC condemns DoE removal of LGBTQ bullying data from federal survey
-
Netherlands5 days agoDutch PM: More needs to be done to defend trans rights
-
Books4 days agoNew book chronicles gay man’s life in hippie commune
