Politics
EXCLUSIVE: Biden campaign previews messaging on Trump’s threat to LGBTQ rights
Campaign warns of the dangers if the former president returns to the White House
In an exclusive interview with the Washington Blade on Thursday, officials with the Biden-Harris reelection campaign explained their strategy for reminding voters of how the rights of LGBTQ Americans were under attack during former President Donald Trump’s first term in office, while also demonstrating how and why a second term would be far worse.
The officials said the LGBTQ-focused messaging in the months ahead will be informed to a large extent by Project 2025, the Heritage Foundation’s 881-page blueprint for Trump’s return to power that would reshape American government by advancing a Christian nationalist agenda.
“We at the campaign are using Project 2025 as an umbrella term for anything and everything that is being proposed by Trump and folks who are aligned with Trump,” an official said.
With respect to Trump’s record, he said the campaign will point out instances in which the former president, for example, opposed legislation that would have advanced LGBTQ-inclusive nondiscrimination protections, appointed judges “who continually are taking away rights,” and targeted healthcare protections “at a governmental level for LGBTQ Americans.”
A campaign memo obtained exclusively by the Blade notes that “As president, Donald Trump and his administration treated the LGBTQ+ community with contempt,” such as by:
- Opposing the legislation to guarantee nondiscrimination protections, while rolling back nondiscrimination employment protections for LGBTQ+ Americans,
- Appointing anti-LGBTQ+ judges who want to rip protections away from LGBTQ+ Americans,
- Erasing health care protections for LGBTQ+ Americans,
- Banning transgender troops from serving, and
- Attempting to repeal the Affordable Care Act, which would end protections for those with preexisting conditions.
In a second Trump term, the official said, those involved in drafting the Project 2025 document have detailed precisely how they would direct “government agencies to openly allow discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity,” imperiling “decades and decades of progress.”
The campaign memo states that, “Trump’s Project 2025 will be even worse for LGBTQ+ Americans, going beyond the ‘Don’t Say Gay’ bill. A second Trump presidency will make it a mission to erode LGBTQ+ Americans’ rights, and undermine their existence.” For instance, the document notes, Trump would:
- Remove nondiscrimination protections for LGBTQ+ Americans,
- Overturn same-sex marriage and protections against anti-sodomy laws,
- Reverse Title IX to remove protections for transgender students,
- Ban and expel transgender military members,
- Book bans,
- Restrict IVF and surrogacy, and
- Appoint more extreme judges who will repeal LGBTQ+ rights
The campaign intends to show voters how the deluge of anti-LGBTQ laws that were introduced and passed at the local and state level over the past few years offer “a preview” of “what we would, unfortunately, see in a second Trump administration,” the official said.
He stressed that these laws go further than targeting the rights of LGBTQ Americans but in many cases seek “to really undermine their existence in public” — and do not constitute “one-off” issues in states like Florida, Alabama or Tennessee, but rather a blueprint for national policy that “Trump and Project 2025 would bring to Americans.”
The official added that these right-wing legislators are abetted by right-wing judges, including U.S. Supreme Court justices, who have stated their interest in challenging same-sex marriage and reviving sodomy laws that were declared unconstitutional more than 20 years ago.
The damage by Trump appointed jurists, he noted, has ranged from rulings challenging safe and effective abortion medication that has been approved for more than 20 years to overturning Covid protections for workers enforced by OSHA.
The campaign official also expressed plans to show how extreme Republican efforts to restrict medically-assisted family planning could carry devastating consequences for LGBTQ families in particular.
The Alabama Supreme Court’s extension of personhood rights to frozen embryos in a ruling last month, which portends the risk of lawsuits targeting clinics that offer in-vitro fertilization, has put elected Republicans on the defense for their support of restrictions on IVF.
“This is a real threat to how people choose to grow their families,” he said.
The false notion that Trump is progressive on ‘social issues’
Part of the work of the campaign, a second official said, will be to disabuse voters of the idea that Trump, perhaps because he is from New York, or because has been married multiple times and has previously proclaimed to be pro-choice, is progressive on “social issues.”
“You have to look at his record and the people that he surrounds him with and what they want to do,” he said. “And the bottom line here is that when it comes to a lot of these issues, he has created the conditions — legally, executively, and culturally — to attack and undermine LGBTQ Americans.”
As an example, he pointed to the Trump-appointed judges on the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals who are considering a case that could reverse a federal mandate for health insurers to cover lifesaving pre-exposure prophylaxis medications that prevent the transmission of HIV.
The first official added, “there is this false perception that Donald Trump is socially liberal, but his record and the people that he’s choosing to fill his administration, what he did as president, and what these allies and he are planning to do in a second Trump administration, go against that perception.”
For voters, he said, it can be “hard to digest all these things and some of this stuff is easier to explain than others, but that’s also why we’re making this effort in the first place” beginning with constituency papers and memos and then the campaign will “continue to hammer this message until November.”
Motivating ‘equality voters’
Since the Jan. 6 insurrection and the decision by the Supreme Court’s conservative supermajority in 2022 that overturned the constitutional right to abortion first established with Roe v. Wade in 1973, the second official said, “there’s more opportunity for us to expand our electorate and reach voters that frankly are outraged by the assault on these basic fundamentals of the United States.”
“Equality voters are not just our community,” the first official said, but rather a “broad and diverse” group who constitute “a high propensity population, especially in some of these battleground [states].”
The campaign is confident that LGBTQ rights are “one of many issues that will motivate folks” to vote, he added.
In terms of the mediums through which the campaign will deliver the message, the second official noted that this involves “managing a highly personalized highly fragmented media environment in which we really have to fire on a lot more cylinders than in a traditional campaign even 10 years ago,” which was “kind of TV-heavy.”
As a result, he said, “you’re seeing a ton of different and diverse ways that we are reaching folks,” from TikTok to Truth Social, the right-wing social media platform founded by Trump, and “paid media that’s skewing heavily toward digital.”
Expect to hear from Biden
LGBTQ rights are “intimate and personal to the president,” the second campaign official said. So, on these matters “you’re going to hear from all of our principals, all of our campaign officials, especially at key moments that are high impact for LGBTQ Americans, including Pride Month.”
“This is a campaign that continues to really represent the diversity of our community, including in inner leadership,” he added.
In November, the Blade interviewed six senior LGBTQ Biden campaign officials for a series of stories about their work on the reelection effort.
Beyond highlighting the dangers presented by Trump, the campaign will continue to show LGBTQ people that Biden, Vice President Kamala Harris, and the administration “will stand up for you and respect your dignity,” the first official said.
“That’s the contrast,” he said. “That’s the choice in this election. We’re going to highlight the history both the Vice President and the President have had supporting LGBTQ rights and implementing them as part of the Biden-Harris agenda and record.”
Biden-Harris 2024 Senior Spokesperson Kevin Munoz shared the following statement on Donald Trump’s plans to eliminate LGBTQ rights:
“The freedom-loving Republican party isn’t so free under Donald Trump’s reign. They’ve told us what we can and cannot read, who we can and cannot love, and are even telling us who we can or cannot be. Donald Trump’s Project 2025 would make it their mission to nationalize the draconian, anti-LGBTQ nightmare we’ve seen at the state level and go even further.
In Joe Biden’s America, the government works for all the American people – not just the people Donald Trump approves of. President Biden is fighting for a more equal, just future, while Donald Trump and his MAGA cronies can’t seem to even acknowledge our existence. We’ll fight in this election like our lives depend on it – because they do.”
2026 Midterm Elections
Meet the LGBTQ candidates running for U.S. House, Senate
Pappas would become first out gay man elected to upper chamber
The midterm elections are often seen as a report card for the party in power, giving voters an opportunity to weigh in on the direction of the country after two years of unified control of the federal government. With Republicans controlling the White House, Congress and the Supreme Court, the 2026 elections could reshape the balance of power in Washington and determine what the next two years of federal policy will look like.
Among the candidates looking to shape that future are a large number of openly LGBTQ politicians running for federal office. All of the candidates listed below openly identify as members of the LGBTQ community and are running as Democrats, seeking seats in both the U.S. House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate. (See below for a list of LGBTQ incumbents.)
The New Candidates
U.S. Senate:
Chris Pappas — NH
The United States House of Representatives:
Cait Conley — NY-17
Jeremy Moss — MI-11
JoAnna Mendoza — AZ-06
Marni von Wilpert — CA-48
Scott Wiener — CA-11
Chris Gallant — NY-1
JD Ford — IN-5
Janelle Sarauw — U.S. Virgin Islands
If all of these candidates running for federal office win their seats, this would make the federal government the queerest legislative term for Congress ever.
Chris Pappas would become the first openly gay male senator if he wins the race against Republican John E. Sununu. Pappas is currently leading early polls 50% to Sununu’s 42%, and is seen as a fairly centrist Democrat with a slew of accomplishments passed through the House since his election in 2018 that make him a desired candidate for the purple “Granite State.”
Cait Conley is fighting to take two-term incumbent Republican Mike Lawler’s seat for New York’s 17th district, covering parts of Westchester, Rockland, Putnam and Dutchess counties. Conley has a long history of working as a public servant through her extensive military service, which includes six overseas deployments with the Army and work with the National Security Council. Current polling shows she has an advantage over her opponent, 64% to his 36%, making this one a race to watch.
Jeremy Moss is running for election in Michigan, after quickly rising in the ranks within the Great Lake state. Moss, who was elected to his city’s city council, then to the state House, then to state Senate has had a lengthy connection with state politics for someone so young. He also served as the state’s first gay president pro tempore. He is running in the Detroit suburbs, including Oakland County. Nearly all polling puts Moss in the lead with some already giving him 99%.
JoAnna Mendoza is a veteran of the U.S. Navy and U.S. Marine Corps running for a House seat for the Tucson and southeastern Arizona area. She has been outspoken about how the cost of everyday necessities under the current leadership of President Trump and Republicans in Congress has made people in her state less safe. She is currently locked in a tight race with her Republican counterpart, leading Juan Ciscomani 47% to 45%.
Marni von Wilpert is running to represent northern San Diego County. She has experience representing the area as a San Diego City Council member, former prosecutor, and Obama workers’ rights attorney. Von Wilpert holds a narrow lead over Republican Jim Desmond, 45% to 42%.
Scott Wiener is looking for a chance to take former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s seat in the San Francisco area. Weiner holds a narrow lead over the Pelosi-endorsed San Francisco supervisor Connie Chan. A New York Times poll has him leading 45% to Chang’s 40%.
Chris Gallant has a slew of federal accomplishments under his belt, from working as an FAA air traffic controller to serving in the U.S. Army and New York Army National Guard, including as a Black Hawk helicopter pilot, and is a volunteer firefighter on Long Island. Despite all of this dedication to public service, he’s running in a solidly red district with recent predictions favor LaLota 81 to 26.
JD Ford is fighting to represent the northern Indianapolis suburbs and north-central Indiana against Republican incumbent Victoria Spartz. He was the first and only openly LGBTQ person elected to the Indiana Legislature, running his campaign on making living more affordable. Polling puts him slightly behind Spartz 48% to 46%.
Janelle Sarauw is trying to win the U.S. Virgin Island’s seat in the U.S. Congress. While there is no voting power, the seat can participate in debates. Sarauw is likely to win the seat after sweeping the primary earlier this year, and will face off against Shelley Moorhead, an independent, in November.
The Incumbents
Becca Balint — VT-At Large
Emily Randall — WA-06
Eric Sorensen — IL-17
Mark Pocan — WI-02
Mark Takano — CA-39
Ritchie Torres — NY-15
Robert Garcia — CA-42
Sarah McBride — DE
Sharice Davids — KS-03
Becca Balint is running for reelection to represent all of Vermont, making her one of the few candidates on this list who represents an entire state rather than a congressional district. Balint, a former teacher and Vermont state senator, has made housing affordability, mental health, and protecting democracy central parts of her platform. Recent polling gives Balint a substantial lead over Republican challenger Gerald Malloy, 60% to Gerald’s 30%.
Emily Randall is running for reelection in Washington’s 6th Congressional District, which includes the Olympic Peninsula and parts of the Kitsap Peninsula across Puget Sound from Seattle. Randall, who previously served in the Washington state Senate, has made expanding access to affordable health care a major part of her platform. She appears to be in a relatively strong position for reelection where she won 60% of the vote in Washington’s August top-two primary, while her Republican opponent Teresa Fox received about 25%.
Eric Sorensen is running for another term representing western Illinois. The former television meteorologist has centered his congressional work on lowering costs for working families. There is no public polling in the race, but a current nonpartisan forecast gives Sorensen 59% of the vote compared to Republican Dillan Vancil, with 40%.
Mark Pocan is seeking to continue representing Madison and south-central Wisconsin. Pocan, who has served in Congress since 2013, has focused on issues including health care affordability, workers’ rights and LGBTQ+ equality. There is no public polling of the race, but the current field has no Republican candidate, and a nonpartisan forecast gives Pocan more than a 99% modeled chance of winning.
Mark Takano is running for reelection in California’s 39th congressional district, which includes Riverside and portions of the Inland Empire east of Los Angeles. Takano has made health care and veterans’ issues major parts of his congressional work. There is no public polling of the race, but in his primary he came in first with 61% of the vote compared to Republican Steve Manos’s 39%.
Ritchie Torres is running for another term representing New York’s 15th congressional district in the Bronx. Torres, who previously served on the New York City Council, has made housing, economic development, education, and public safety major parts of his platform. There is no current public polling of the race, but multiple prediction sites have it squarely his to win.
Robert Garcia is seeking another term representing California’s 42nd congressional district, which includes Long Beach and southeastern Los Angeles County. Garcia, the former mayor of Long Beach, has focused on issues including infrastructure, transportation, education, and LGBTQ+ rights while in Congress. There is no public polling of the race, but forecasting has Garcia winning the seat over Republican Brian Burley 99% to 1%.
Sarah McBride, is running for reelection to represent Delaware’s sole congressional district, meaning she represents the entire state. McBride, who made history as the first openly transgender member of Congress, has centered her campaign on lowering health care costs, protecting reproductive health care, and strengthening workers’ rights. There is no public polling of the general election, but a current nonpartisan forecast gives McBride a 99.1% modeled chance of winning against Republican Joseph Arminio.
Sharice Davids is seeking another term representing Kansas’ 3rd Congressional District, which covers the Kansas side of the Kansas City metropolitan area. Davids, a former White House fellow and attorney, has made agriculture, lowering costs, and health care central parts of her platform. There is no current public polling of the race, but prediction polling shows she has a 94% chance of winning her race.
White House
Trump-appointed judge restores White House TV pool access
Judge called in to question president’s justification of the ban
A federal judge ordered the White House to restore West Wing press credentials to three news organizations after President Donald Trump attempted to bar their access for unfavorable reporting.
Early Thursday morning, Trump-appointed U.S. District Judge Timothy Kelly granted a temporary restraining order brought by POLITICO, CNN, and MS NOW as part of a joint lawsuit. The lawsuit cites the imperative role of a “free press” and ordered the 78 journalists’ credentials returned to the three outlets for at least the next two weeks as litigation plays out.
In the eight-page ruling, the judge goes over a slew of laws that Trump may have violated in banning the three media groups — from stepping on their First Amendment rights to a free press to the Fifth Amendment right to due process.
The judge also questioned Trump’s justification for removing the outlets, originally saying it was a matter of national security.
“The court is skeptical — at least on this record — that defendants’ interest in safeguarding national security is the actual motivation for, or is even advanced by, the revocation of plaintiffs’ hard passes,” Kelly wrote in an 8-page ruling issued just before 1 a.m. ET.
“Nothing in the record that predates this suit suggests that the revocation of plaintiffs’ hard passes was motivated by national security concerns. Certainly, that is not what President Trump said when he announced that he was ‘banning’ plaintiffs from the White House — instead, he focused on the alleged lack of truthfulness and negativity of plaintiffs’ reporting,” the judge added.
The Washington Blade reached out to the White House press office asking if the administration would file an appeal to keep the journalists out of the West Wing but did not hear back before publication time.
White House
White House press pool pushes back after Trump bars three outlets
As President Trump refuses entry to outlets he deems unreasonable, lawsuits have been filed to regain access to the West Wing
Past the first checkpoint to get into the White House, multiple carts filled with camera equipment sat along a fence. Wagons loaded with tripods, cables, mics, and cameras sat just past where they normally would be working at full power. Today, they were turned off and packed away.
Last week, President Donald Trump decided to bar CNN, MS NOW and POLITICO from the White House following reporting he considers “FAKE NEWS.”
Trump, in a post on Truth Social on Monday morning, described his move as “instituting an assault on the FAKE NEWS,” which he said has “grown like Cancer in our beloved United States of America.”
“It is corrupt, purposeful, pervasive, fully coordinated, and totally out of control,” he wrote on the social media site he owns. “It is a threat to our National Security, and must be stopped, NOW!”
As a result, all of the major television networks that comprise the television press pool — ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, and Fox News — suspended their White House TV pool coverage. They decided to no longer send camera crews to cover President Donald Trump’s events.
“The public has a vital interest in receiving accurate, independent information about its government,” the five White House TV pool networks said in a joint statement Monday. “No administration should restrict a news organization because it objects to its reporting.”
POLITICO, CNN and MS NOW filed a lawsuit Monday to immediately restore access for their reporters, who had their credentials confiscated by the Secret Service.
In the White House, there was a noticeable shift in the atmosphere. The Washington Blade is the only LGBTQ news outlet that is part of the White House Press Pool, and was acting as the primary print pooler as the situation unfolded on Monday.
Whispers about who might be kicked from the press pool next could be heard both in the press area of the West Wing, as well as outside the part of the White House dedicated to filming the president’s office. The area where TV stations normally film their live shots of the White House while reporting looked less busy than a normal Monday — especially as the president made his way to New York City ahead of the UN General Assembly meeting this week.

CNN’s outdoor filming area, which is staffed nearly at all times, sat dark with a green cover over the space that normally houses its cameras and political reporters like Kaitlan Collins.
There were small signs of solidarity from other outlets in the press office. A sign that has hung outside one of the news offices in the West Wing was updated. It originally read, “WE STAND WITH AP” following President Trump’s first attempt at removing a news outlet he deemed unfavorable. It now includes “I STAND WITH AP CNN MSNOW POLITICO.”
The change could also be felt as the press pool attempted to cover the president.
There was a ribbon cutting in honor of the $6 million helipad installed at Trump’s behest — which had nearly no audio as a result of fewer microphones in the space following the outlets’ removal on Monday afternoon, and partly because of the loud sound of Marine One.
Vice President JD Vance defended Trump when asked about the changes to TV access at the White House, standing with the president despite this likely being a violation of the First Amendment’s guarantee of a free and fair press.
“He’s not banning media outlets. What he’s doing is saying we’re not going to give you special access to the White House if you engage in what is effectively propaganda,” Vance said, alleging that 92% of the stories from CNN, MS NOW and Politico about Trump are “negative.”
“That’s not representative of the American people. It’s not representative of public opinion,” Vance said.
He pushed back on the notion that this is a hindrance on free speech — claiming access to the president through White House visitation is a privilege — a privilege that in this administration, at least until courts weigh in, could change the landscape of the American media system.
“It’s about basic fairness. They can still report. They still have the access to free speech. They’re just not going to get an office in the White House anymore,” Vance said.
Jacqui Heinrich, the White House Correspondents Association President condemned the president’s actions in restricting media access in a statement sent to WHCA members on Saturday.
“Today’s action revoking access for journalists from CNN, POLITICO, and MSNOW violates the First Amendment. The implications extend beyond these organizations: a standard used to exclude one news outlet because of its coverage could be applied to any outlet in the future.
“The American people, through a free and independent press, must be able to scrutinize those elected to power, regardless of whether government officials view it favorably. That’s why courts have repeatedly held that once the White House provides access to journalists, it cannot deny that access arbitrarily or based on the content of their reporting. The WHCA calls on the administration to immediately restore our colleagues’ access.”
-
Virginia5 days agoGay Va. couple hopeful voters will enshrine marriage equality in state constitution
-
Opinions4 days agoLGBTQ community must vote in big numbers
-
LGBTQ Non-Profit Organizations5 days agoVictory Fund board investigates former staffers’ allegations against CEO Evan Low
-
Opinions4 days agoThe right to be an ordinary transgender man
