National
A trans president? March organizer dares to dream
Fifth annual Trans Visibility March was held Aug. 24

The fifth annual Transgender Visibility March returned to D.C. on Saturday, Aug. 24. This marked the first time the march has been back in D.C. since the inaugural event in 2019, which featured “Pose” star Angelica Ross and then-Human Rights Campaign president Alphonso David.
The Washington Blade caught up with Hope Giselle-Godsey, executive director of the march, as she got ready for the festivities.
BLADE: Would you mind telling me a little bit of background about yourself? How did you end up in the position of executive director of the Trans Visibility March?
GISELLE-GODSEY: I started with the March in 2018 when Marissa [Miller, the founder of the march,] reached out to me and asked me for my help. She realized that with my platform and everything that has been built, I would be the perfect person to do public-facing events. Of course, I jumped at the opportunity because when Marissa Miller calls you answer.
That turned into me just being called upon every year. This year I got that call, but it was a little different. She says to me, “Hope it is time for me to move out of the way, and I want there to be some new leadership, and I want to know if you’re willing to take on the mantle of leader of the March?”
That took me by surprise, one because I just wasn’t I didn’t know that I was in the running. It was a full circle moment, and it felt really good that someone who had mentored me in the space was willing to trust me with something that her and her partner, Lynn, had built from the ground up.
BLADE: Could you tell me a bit about the march? Why does it exist? What are its goals?
GISELLE-GODSEY: The March has a goal of making sure that we create visibility around the issues that are facing trans people every year, because, contrary to popular belief, they are not always the same. They don’t always look the same, and they are not maintained year to year.
For instance, this year, we’re heavily talking about the idea of voting. We’re also really digging deeper into our sexual health and what that component of the conversation looks like. What will be to truly figure out what sexual freedom looks like for people who are often taught that abstinence is the only way to feel sexually free? We just know that that’s not simply true.
We also have a focus on the youth. They’re going to have the torches passed to them at some point. We want to make sure that as we are activating and growing in this fight for trans visibility and equality that we are including the voices of tomorrow that are going to be taking up the mantle.
We have Jay Jones, who is the first trans student body president at Howard University, who is going to be opening the march with me tomorrow. We want to make sure that her voice is heard, and that folks understand that she is creating history at an HBCU as a Black trans woman. Those things deserve to be celebrated.
BLADE: Trans people face outsized violence. Protesters have faced rising violence. It is a point of bravery to be out on the streets like this, I am sure some people are nervous. Do you have any words about what it means to be marching, as a trans person?
GISELLE-GODSEY: It’s a true testament of being tired of following the status quo and allowing your fear to dictate what your freedom can look like.
People don’t understand the need to be visible in order to feel free. Marches like this help people to understand that if we aren’t seen, people can pretend like we don’t exist. That does us a disservice.
By creating the space in this March, you have to do it alone. It offers a lot of folks who would normally never speak up about issues that they are passionate about because they would feel like if they did it, there was a higher chance for violence or there was a higher chance for something to go wrong.
In spaces where you have not only community, but you have allies and accomplices, it creates a space that opens a new world. It helps us to truly begin to change the narrative around what it looks like to feel and be safe as trans people.
BLADE: The last time you all marched in Washington, we were in a different political climate. Trump was in office versus Biden. Anti-trans legislation was just beginning its tidal wave. Can you reflect on this juxtaposition and the stakes it means to be marching for trans visibility on this distinctly political stage?
GISELLE-GODSEY: It reminds us that we are never safe in the eyes of the social public that wants to make everyone believe that we are a threat to their existence, when, in fact, it is the opposite.
It forces us to be mindful about how we take breaks from work. We may feel like “Well, we got this passed, this TV show was created, so we can pause.” [Marching in D.C.] reminds us that until the most marginalized of us are free, none of us are truly free. That quote is overused but for all the right reasons.
Until all of us have the opportunity to be in TV shows, host spaces, graduate, and all of these things without it being a huge hoopla, without people having to make an article about it, then we might be able to take a little break.
Over these last five years, some of us have gotten a little comfortable with the idea of trusting that the system that is rigged against anyone different.
BLADE: Are there any ideas, events, people, or motivations you all are holding when you march?
GISELLE-GODSEY: Illuminate, educate, and advocate. Those are three pillars this year.
We are standing firm on amplifying those things, owning those things, making those things our bread and butter. When folks leave [the march], they leave with the ability to feel like they can do those things on their own.
There is space for you to illuminate your problems or your areas of opportunity, whether it be with your boss or whether it be with your city council member. You can educate them about why these things are important. You can become a stronger advocate.
We want to make sure that folks understand that these are not just pillars for the march, but these could be pillars for your life.
BLADE: What does your vision of the future for the transgender community look like?
GISELLE-GODSEY: I see us having a transgender president, though I’m not sure if I want to be that person.
I see a future where trans people can dream in the same way that other marginalized groups of people have been able to dream and see themselves actualized.
As a person from the intersection of both transness and Blackness, seeing Obama being sworn into office felt amazing.
As children you get told you can be whatever you want to be, but for so long, as Black folks, we also understood that there was a silent list of things that we probably shouldn’t strive to do.
What I see for the future is that in the same way that that glass ceiling is being broken for certain marginalized people, with the example of Obama being one of them, I would love to see that being broken for trans people.
I do see that being broken for trans people. I think that we are on the brink of having our first woman president — not to mention she’s a biracial, Black woman. In the next eight years, there might be another cultural shift, and we could have a trans president.
It feels amazing to remind people that those are actual possibilities now, and not just things to ponder over with friends at a kiki in a basement.
BLADE: Anything else?
GISELLE-GODSEY: There is an idea that we only need visibility because of the deaths that are happening. What I’m trying to showcase to folks is that the visibility March is not just because we are being murdered, it is also because we are not being heard. Our issues are not being heard.
We want trans men to be able to have access to proper health care. We want to be able to access safe-sex practices that are taught by and fostered for TGN people. There are so many things that are important to us.
When we have these conversations, we’re often whittled down to this idea of just being trans people who are upset – rightfully so – about the fact that some of our siblings are being killed. But that is not the only reason that we march. I want folks to understand and know that this isn’t just about a death toll.
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.