Connect with us

National

Project 2025’s ‘War on Porn’ threatens sex workers, LGBTQ community

Far-right plan for second Trump administration includes 32 anti-LGBTQ provisions

Published

on

GOP presidential nominee Donald Trump claims he’s unfamiliar with Project 2025, but observers fear he would embrace its far-right agenda as president. (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

Civil liberties and LGBTQ rights advocates have expressed alarm that a proposal to criminalize pornography in a 920-page far-right blueprint for the first 180 days of a second Trump administration known as Project 2025 would have a far-reaching impact that threatens the rights of sex workers and the LGBTQ community, especially the transgender community.

Project 2025 was created by a coalition of several dozen conservative and religious-right organizations led by the D.C.-based Heritage Foundation, with most of them having opposed LGBTQ rights for many years and several having been designated as anti-LGBTQ hate groups by the Southern Poverty Law Center.

LGBTQ rights organizations, including the Human Rights Campaign, the nation’s largest LGBTQ rights group, and the LGBTQ advocacy group GLAAD, point out that Project 2025 includes at least 32 specific provisions that call for rolling back LGBTQ rights, including marriage equality and LGBTQ nondiscrimination protections in federal government agencies.

“Project 2025 demonstrates what four years of a Trump-Vance administration would look like,” HRC said in a statement. “It is a wrecking ball aimed at the very foundations of civil rights, LGBTQ+ rights, health care access, voting rights, and environmental protections,” the statement says.

GLAAD President and CEO Sarah Kate Ellis said in a statement that Project 2025 “would create an America where the freedoms that are a hallmark to our Democracy are replaced with authoritarianism and the progress we have made for LGBTQ people, people of color, women, and other marginalized communities is stripped away.”

Former President Donald Trump, who won the Republican presidential nomination last month at the GOP convention in Milwaukee, has disavowed Project 2025, saying he played no role in creating it and he does not agree with many of its provisions. But political observers point out that former Trump administration officials and many longtime Trump supporters played a lead role in developing Project 2025. Democratic Party leaders are predicting much of Project 2025’s content, including its anti-LGBTQ provisions, would likely be backed by a Trump administration.

With that as a backdrop, civil liberties advocates and representatives of the adult entertainment industry, including sex worker advocacy groups, are saying criminalization of pornography as proposed by Project 2025 would have far reaching negative consequences, including a negative impact on the LGBTQ community. 

“The impact would be vast, and censorship of ‘pornography’ is central to this project,” according to a statement released by the Free Speech Coalition, which describes itself as a nonpartisan trade association for the adult entertainment industry. “The mandate calls for banning ‘pornography’ – broadly defined to include LGBTQ+ content – and imprisoning those who distribute it,” the statement says.

The Free Speech Coalition and other groups and activists opposing a ban on pornography point out that the text of Project 2025’s provision calling for a ban on porn seeks to create a link between what it calls harmful pornography and the transgender and LGBTQ communities.

Here is the full text of the Project 2025 provision for criminalizing pornography:

“Pornography, manifested today in the omnipresent propagation of transgender ideology and sexualization of children, for instance, is not a political Gordian knot inextricably binding up disparate claims about free speech, property rights, sexual liberation, and child welfare. It has no claim to First Amendment protection. Its purveyors are child predators and misogynistic exploiters of women. Their product is as addictive as any illicit drug and as psychologically destructive as any crime. Pornography should be outlawed. The people who produce and distribute it should be imprisoned. Educators and public librarians who purvey it should be classed as registered sex offenders. And telecommunications and technology firms that facilitate its spread should be shuttered.”

According to the Free Speech Coalition, “With new laws calling for the imprisonment of those who produce or distribute adult content, Project 2025 advocates for the arrest of millions of adult content creators – a War on Porn that might mimic the War on Drugs.”

The group adds in its statement, “This risk to anyone working in the sex industry is enormous but given the project’s twin concerns about LGBTQ+ content, would likely fall most heavily on LGBTQ+ sex workers, pushing them further into the margins, and increasing risk of violence and exploitation.”

Among those who share that concern is Cyndee Clay, executive director of the D.C.-based sex worker advocacy group HIPS. “Calls to outlaw pornography are problematic enough, but they also take one more legal option for sex work away from people who do sex work,” Clay told the Washington Blade. “What’s more concerning is this push from Project 2025 seems to be less about pornography itself and more about attacking trans rights and trans voices,” Clay said.

The Blade’s attempt to reach some of the largest online porn sites like Pornhub and the popular gay dating and sex meet-up site Grindr were unsuccessful. The ACLU, which has championed rights of sexual freedom for many years, didn’t respond to the Blade’s request for comment on Project 2025. But in a brief statement on its website, the ACLU criticizes Project 2025 as a plan to “dismantle policies put in place to protect our civil rights and liberties and establish a more authoritarian rule of law.”

The statement adds, “Along with our network of affiliates and coalition partners in all 50 states, we are armed with tools and tactics to protect against executive action that would take away our rights.”

Blair Hopkins, executive director of the Sex Worker Outreach Project Behind Bars, known as SWOP, said she believes the large adult industry companies like Pornhub, and others will be working behind the scenes to oppose Project 2025. Hopkins said the criminalization of porn would have a dramatic impact on the multi-million adult entertainment industry, which through its online sites and employment of sex workers as actors and support workers is an important segment of the nation’s economy.

According to its website, Pornhub alone has more than 100 million daily visits to its adult website and 36 billion visits per year. It says it has 20 million registered Pornhub users.

Hopkins said Pornhub has provided financial support for SWOP and other organizations that support sex workers.

“It’s been said that sex workers are the canary in the coal mine when it comes to any kind of civil rights,” Hopkins told the Blade. “And that is proven to be true over and over again,” she said. “So, what I think they’re talking about is not only will pornography be banned and criminalized, but also that anything can be categorized as pornography. And that is directly targeting the LGBTQ community.”

Todd Evans, executive director of the National LGBT Media Association, which represents LGBTQ news publications across the country, said a ban on pornography like what is being proposed by Project 2025 could have a negative impact on LGBTQ media outlets.

“Just think about it,” he said. “Who is defining pornography? What does that mean? Is Michelangelo’s ‘David’ pornography?” 

Evans added, “It definitely has an effect on LGBT media because it goes back to what that definition of pornography is. And does it depend on who is delivering it? Like if it’s an LGBT publication, is that definition harsher than maybe a mainstream publication?”

Adult entertainment advocates have also pointed out that access to porn has already effectively been “banned” in several states that have passed laws calling for the adult sites to require anyone visiting the site to provide an identification document such as a driver’s license to show they are an adult. This has prompted some porn sites, including Pornhub, to discontinue operating in those states. 

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

U.S. Federal Courts

Judge temporarily blocks executive orders targeting LGBTQ, HIV groups

Lambda Legal filed the lawsuit in federal court

Published

on

President Donald Trump (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

A federal judge on Monday blocked the enforcement of three of President Donald Trump’s executive orders that would have threatened to defund nonprofit organizations providing health care and services for LGBTQ people and those living with HIV.

The preliminary injunction was awarded by Judge Jon Tigar of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California in a case, San Francisco AIDS Foundation v. Trump, filed by Lambda Legal and eight other organizations.

Implementation of the executive orders — two aimed at diversity, equity, and inclusion along with one targeting the transgender community — will be halted pending the outcome of the litigation challenging them.

“This is a critical win — not only for the nine organizations we represent, but for LGBTQ communities and people living with HIV across the country,” said Jose Abrigo, Lambda Legal’s HIV Project director and senior counsel on the case. 

“The court blocked anti-equity and anti-LGBTQ executive orders that seek to erase transgender people from public life, dismantle DEI efforts, and silence nonprofits delivering life-saving services,” Abrigo said. “Today’s ruling acknowledges the immense harm these policies inflict on these organizations and the people they serve and stops Trump’s orders in their tracks.”

Tigar wrote, in his 52-page decision, “While the Executive requires some degree of freedom to implement its political agenda, it is still bound by the constitution.”

“And even in the context of federal subsidies, it cannot weaponize Congressionally appropriated funds to single out protected communities for disfavored treatment or suppress ideas that it does not like or has deemed dangerous,” he said.

Without the preliminary injunction, the judge wrote, “Plaintiffs face the imminent loss of federal funding critical to their ability to provide lifesaving healthcare and support services to marginalized LGBTQ populations,” a loss that “not only threatens the survival of critical programs but also forces plaintiffs to choose between their constitutional rights and their continued existence.”

The organizations in the lawsuit are located in California (San Francisco AIDS Foundation, Los Angeles LGBT Center, GLBT Historical Society, and San Francisco Community Health Center), Arizona (Prisma Community Care), New York (The NYC LGBT Community Center), Pennsylvania (Bradbury-Sullivan Community Center), Maryland (Baltimore Safe Haven), and Wisconsin (FORGE).

Continue Reading

U.S. Supreme Court

Activists rally for Andry Hernández Romero in front of Supreme Court

Gay asylum seeker ‘forcibly deported’ to El Salvador, described as political prisoner

Published

on

Immigrant Defenders Law Center President Lindsay Toczylowski, on right, speaks in support of her client, Andry Hernández Romero, in front of the U.S. Supreme Court on June 6, 2025. (Washington Blade photo by Michael K. Lavers)

More than 200 people gathered in front of the U.S. Supreme Court on Friday and demanded the Trump-Vance administration return to the U.S. a gay Venezuelan asylum seeker who it “forcibly disappeared” to El Salvador.

Lindsay Toczylowski, president of the Immigrant Defenders Law Center, a Los Angeles-based organization that represents Andry Hernández Romero, is among those who spoke alongside U.S. Rep. Mark Takano (D-Calif.) and Human Rights Campaign Campaigns and Communications Vice President Jonathan Lovitz. Sarah Longwell of the Bulwark, Pod Save America’s Jon Lovett, and Tim Miller are among those who also participated in the rally.

“Andry is a son, a brother. He’s an actor, a makeup artist,” said Toczylowski. “He is a gay man who fled Venezuela because it was not safe for him to live there as his authentic self.”

(Video by Michael K. Lavers)

The White House on Feb. 20 designated Tren de Aragua, a Venezuelan gang, as an “international terrorist organization.”

President Donald Trump on March 15 invoked the Alien Enemies Act of 1798, which the Associated Press notes allows the U.S. to deport “noncitizens without any legal recourse.” The Trump-Vance administration subsequently “forcibly removed” Hernández and hundreds of other Venezuelans to El Salvador.

Toczylowski said she believes Hernández remains at El Salvador’s Terrorism Confinement Center, a maximum-security prison known by the Spanish acronym CECOT. Toczylowski also disputed claims that Hernández is a Tren de Aragua member.

“Andry fled persecution in Venezuela and came to the U.S. to seek protection. He has no criminal history. He is not a member of the Tren de Aragua gang. Yet because of his crown tattoos, we believe at this moment that he sits in a torture prison, a gulag, in El Salvador,” said Toczylowski. “I say we believe because we have not had any proof of life for him since the day he was put on a U.S. government-funded plane and forcibly disappeared to El Salvador.”

“Andry is not alone,” she added.

Takano noted the federal government sent his parents, grandparents, and other Japanese Americans to internment camps during World War II under the Alien Enemies Act. The gay California Democrat also described Hernández as “a political prisoner, denied basic rights under a law that should have stayed in the past.”

“He is not a case number,” said Takano. “He is a person.”

Hernández had been pursuing his asylum case while at the Otay Mesa Detention Center in San Diego.

A hearing had been scheduled to take place on May 30, but an immigration judge the day before dismissed his case. Immigrant Defenders Law Center has said it will appeal the decision to the Board of Immigration Appeals, which the Justice Department oversees.

“We will not stop fighting for Andry, and I know neither will you,” said Toczylowski.

Friday’s rally took place hours after Attorney General Pam Bondi said Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a Maryland man who the Trump-Vance administration wrongfully deported to El Salvador, had returned to the U.S. Abrego will face federal human trafficking charges in Tennessee.

Continue Reading

National

A husband’s story: Michael Carroll reflects on life with Edmund White

Iconic author died this week; ‘no sunnier human in the world’

Published

on

Michael Carroll spoke to the Blade after the death his husband Edmund White this week. (Photo by Michael Carroll)

Unlike most gay men of my generation, I’ve only been to Fire Island twice. Even so, the memory of my first visit has never left me. The scenery was lovely, and the boys were sublime — but what stood out wasn’t the beach or the parties. It was a quiet afternoon spent sipping gin and tonics in a mid-century modern cottage tucked away from the sand and sun.

Despite Fire Island’s reputation for hedonism, our meeting was more accident than escapade. Michael Carroll — a Facebook friend I’d chatted with but never met — mentioned that he and his husband, Ed, would be there that weekend, too. We agreed to meet for a drink. On a whim, I checked his profile and froze. Ed was author Edmund White.

I packed a signed copy of Carroll’s “Little Reef” and a dog-eared hardback of “A Boy’s Own Story,” its spine nearly broken from rereads. I was excited to meet both men and talk about writing, even briefly.

Yesterday, I woke to the news that Ed had passed away. Ironically, my first thought was of Michael.

This week, tributes to Edmund White are everywhere — rightly celebrating his towering legacy as a novelist, essayist, and cultural icon. I’ve read all of his books, and I could never do justice to the scope of a career that defined and chronicled queer life for more than half a century. I’ll leave that to better-prepared journalists.

But in those many memorials, I’ve noticed something missing. When Michael Carroll is mentioned, it’s usually just a passing reference: “White’s partner of thirty years, twenty-five years his junior.” And yet, in the brief time I spent with this couple on Fire Island, it was clear to me that Michael was more than a footnote — he was Ed’s anchor, editor, companion, and champion. He was the one who knew his husband best.

They met in 1995 after Michael wrote Ed a fan letter to tell him he was coming to Paris. “He’d lost the great love of his life a year before,” Michael told me. “In one way, I filled a space. Understand, I worshiped this man and still do.”

When I asked whether there was a version of Ed only he knew, Michael answered without hesitation: “No sunnier human in the world, obvious to us and to people who’ve only just or never met him. No dark side. Psychology had helped erase that, I think, or buffed it smooth.”

Despite the age difference and divergent career arcs, their relationship was intellectually and emotionally symbiotic. “He made me want to be elegant and brainy; I didn’t quite reach that, so it led me to a slightly pastel minimalism,” Michael said. “He made me question my received ideas. He set me free to have sex with whoever I wanted. He vouchsafed my moods when they didn’t wobble off axis. Ultimately, I encouraged him to write more minimalistically, keep up the emotional complexity, and sleep with anyone he wanted to — partly because I wanted to do that too.”

Fully open, it was a committed relationship that defied conventional categories. Ed once described it as “probably like an 18th-century marriage in France.” Michael elaborated: “It means marriage with strong emotion — or at least a tolerance for one another — but no sex; sex with others. I think.”

That freedom, though, was always anchored in deep devotion and care — and a mutual understanding that went far beyond art, philosophy, or sex. “He believed in freedom and desire,” Michael said, “and the two’s relationship.”

When I asked what all the essays and articles hadn’t yet captured, Michael paused. “Maybe that his writing was tightly knotted, but that his true personality was vulnerable, and that he had the defense mechanisms of cheer and optimism to conceal that vulnerability. But it was in his eyes.”

The moment that captured who Ed was to him came at the end. “When he was dying, his second-to-last sentence (garbled then repeated) was, ‘Don’t forget to pay Merci,’ the cleaning lady coming the next day. We had had a rough day, and I was popping off like a coach or dad about getting angry at his weakness and pushing through it. He took it almost like a pack mule.” 

Edmund White’s work shaped generations — it gave us language for desire, shame, wit, and liberation. But what lingers just as powerfully is the extraordinary life Ed lived with a man who saw him not only as a literary giant but as a real person: sunny, complex, vulnerable, generous.

In the end, Ed’s final words to his husband weren’t about his books or his legacy. They were about care, decency, and love. “You’re good,” he told Michael—a benediction, a farewell, maybe even a thank-you.

And now, as the world celebrates the prolific writer and cultural icon Edmund White, it feels just as important to remember the man and the person who knew him best. Not just the story but the characters who stayed to see it through to the end.

Continue Reading

Popular