Opinions
Project 2025’s dire impact on libraries
New report warns of prosecuting teachers and librarians

Project 2025 has been much in the news lately. It is a 900-page manifesto put out by the hyper-conservative Heritage Foundation that lays out a detailed plan for the right-wing to take over the government and implement severely regressive policies in the event that Trump wins the general election in November.
The EveryLibrary Institute, a nonprofit advocacy group whose purpose is to protect libraries from right-wing assaults, has issued a report titled, “Project 2025 and Its Consequences for Libraries.” What the report has uncovered is dire indeed for libraries, both public libraries and school libraries, should Project 2025 be enacted.
For more than a decade, libraries have been facing increasingly aggressive attacks from right-wing activists and organizations like Moms for Liberty. The attacks start with school libraries, pushing for the removal or outright banning of LGBTQ materials, but soon expands to defining anything LGBTQ-related as pornographic, calling for the dismissal and/or prosecution of librarians and teachers as pornographers attempting to sexualize children. They then move on to public libraries, threatening (sometimes successfully) facilities and staffs with budget cuts and outright closure.
Project 2025 dives deep and early into the anti-LGBTQ agenda. In its very first section, the manifesto points to schools and libraries, among other things, as sources of a moral rot that threatens the existence of America. On page 1 the manifesto states that, “children suffer the toxic normalization of transgenderism with drag queens and pornography invading their school libraries.” It goes on to say that “educators and public librarians who purvey it [i.e., ‘pornography’] should be classed as registered sex offenders.”
EveryLibrary’s report explains how Project 2025 puts LGBTQ students (and educators who support them) at extreme risk. “Project 2025 would make public schools even more dangerous for LGBTQIA+ students,” the report says, “allowing them to be discriminated against and marginalized by insisting on a strict definition of one’s ‘sex.’ Amendments to Title IX would define ‘sex’ under Title IX to mean only biological sex recognized at birth; and strengthen protections for faith-based educational institutions, programs, and activities biological sex assigned at birth while rescinding the Biden administration’s expansion of Title IX protections.”
Further, the report says, “By suggesting schools and public libraries are purveyors of pornography, the Heritage Foundation uses the word pornography’s fear factor to vilify respected members of communities, spreading distrust, anxiety, and outrage. Book bans, censoring lessons, self-censoring library and classroom materials, mandated curricular changes, and vague legislative language outlawing topics and teaching styles are causing exhausted librarians and teachers to leave their jobs and often their professions as well.”
Libraries are particularly vulnerable to budget cuts. The Heritage Foundation well knows this. The report points out that Project 2025, in addition to eliminating the Department of Education, would dismantle the Institute of Museum and Library Services. The IMLS is an independent agency that administers federal funds to libraries and museums. The loss of federal funding would end a wide range of programs, including library workforce development, technology upgrades, and community outreach initiatives. Libraries, particularly those in underserved and rural areas, would struggle to maintain current levels of service without federal support. This could lead to reduced hours, staff layoffs, and the elimination of important programs and services.
The loss of federal funding would disproportionately affect low-income and marginalized populations that rely on library services for access to information and opportunities for lifelong learning. Tribal libraries, in particular, would face challenges in preserving cultural heritage and providing educational resources.
The proposed dissolution of the Department of Education would also seriously impinge on the federal government’s ability to enforce civil rights laws in schools, which would be significantly reduced, moving enforcement to the Justice Department and limiting investigations. Reduced civil rights enforcement could lead to increased discrimination and inequity in schools. School libraries, as inclusive spaces that support diverse student populations, would struggle to maintain a safe and equitable environment for all students.
The report also points out the danger in the Heritage Foundation’s alliance with other far right-wing groups like Moms for Liberty. Policies promoted by Moms for Liberty often lead to the censorship of LGBTQ-inclusive materials, limiting access to diverse and critical information. Project 2025’s proposed changes, coupled with the influence of anti-LGBTQ and “parental rights” groups, present significant challenges for the quality of education and the role of public libraries in providing safe spaces and much-needed information for LGBTQ students.
EveryLibrary’s report wraps up its overview of the dangers Project 2025 poses not just to libraries, but to intellectual freedom in general, as well as to inclusivity and civil rights for marginalized communities, with a call for action. It says:
“The Project 2025 proposals must be taken seriously. The Heritage Foundation has tremendous influence in certain political circles. We have seen the impact of the alignments between Heritage and like-minded movements like Moms for Liberty about censorship, the Koch Brothers network about anti-tax movements, and the Trump administration’s repeated proposals to defund IMLS. Voters who care about libraries—and the people they serve—need to understand the impact that implementing Project 2025 will have on society and libraries.”
Gary L. Day is a freelance writer.
Opinions
What if doctors could deny you insulin for being gay?
The Supreme Court just made that legal for trans kids

Imagine walking into a pharmacy, prescription in hand, and being told, “Sorry, we don’t give that to people like you.” Now imagine the government says that’s perfectly fine—as long as it’s wrapped in words like “concern” or “safety.”
That’s not a dystopian movie plot. That’s United States v. Skrmetti.
On June 18, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld Tennessee’s SB1, a state law that bans gender-affirming care for minors. Puberty blockers. Hormone therapy. All of it. Not because the treatments are dangerous (they’re not), or untested (they’re not), but because the kids receiving them are transgender.
Let’s be clear: this isn’t regulation. It’s targeted denial. And it just got the Supreme Court’s stamp of approval.
Chief Justice John Roberts, writing for the majority, said SB1 doesn’t discriminate. He argued the law merely regulates treatment based on “age and purpose.” That’s a little like banning seatbelts—but only for gay people—and claiming it’s about “safety.” Here’s the truth: SB1 bans hormone therapy only when it’s used for gender transition. Those same drugs are still allowed for other conditions. That’s not neutral. That’s surgical discrimination, written into law.
Even Tennessee’s legal team admitted it: the law “only affects those who seek to transition.” That’s not an accidental loophole. That’s the entire point.
Even worse, the Court ducked the bigger question: Do transgender Americans qualify as a “suspect class” under the Constitution—meaning they deserve stronger protections against discrimination?
Historically, groups with a long track record of discrimination, limited political power, and immutable traits (like race or religion) have gotten this status. Trans people check every box. Yet the Court said nothing.
That silence wasn’t a technicality. It was a political decision. A willful refusal to say: “You matter. You count. You’re protected here.”
Let’s drop the pretense. This isn’t about medicine or morality. Gender-affirming care is backed by every major U.S. medical association—from the American Academy of Pediatrics to the AMA. It’s safe. It’s effective. And it saves lives.
But these laws don’t ban puberty blockers across the board. They just ban them for trans kids.
That’s not policy—it’s punishment.
We wouldn’t tolerate a law that banned mammograms for women, or insulin for diabetics, only if they’re queer. But that’s exactly what this is: identity-based medical apartheid.
Supporters claim it’s about protecting children. But you don’t protect kids by denying them care recommended by doctors and supported by science. You do that to control who they’re allowed to become.
Here’s the part that should make us all pause: Most Americans don’t agree with this decision. A recent Pew poll found that 64% of Americans support protections for transgender people. Nearly 60% support access to gender-affirming care. Among young adults, those numbers are even higher.
This isn’t a red state vs. blue state issue. It’s a basic civil rights question in the 21st century. The people are not divided. But our institutions—the courts, the legislatures—are lagging behind. Or worse, being weaponized.
This ruling leaves trans youth legally exposed and politically abandoned. But that doesn’t mean we’re powerless.
Here’s what must happen now:
· State legislatures must pass ironclad non-discrimination laws that protect transgender youth where federal protections now fall short.
· Congress must pass the Equality Act—in full—and enshrine civil rights protections for LGBTQ+ Americans nationwide.
· The media must stop framing this as just another “culture war.” This isn’t about ideology. It’s about constitutional rights—access to care, bodily autonomy, and equal protection under the law.
· And we the people must act. Vote. Call your lawmakers. Tell your stories. Make it clear that civil rights don’t depend on your zip code, political party, or gender identity.
This moment is more than a court ruling. It’s a moral test for a country that claims to believe in liberty and justice for all.
You don’t have to be trans to be alarmed. If the state can deny medical care to one group based on identity, what’s to stop them from doing it to you? Your kid? Your neighbor?
History will remember where we stood. Let it remember this: we stood with trans kids and their parents. Loudly. Unapologetically. And without retreat.
James Bridgeforth, Ph.D., is a national columnist on the intersection of politics, morality, and civil rights. His work regularly appears in The Chicago Defender and The Black Wall Street Times.

The felon in the White House, who has lied his way to victory, has now signed his ‘big disgusting bill’ into law. He has managed to get members of Congress to agree to screw their own constituents, and vote for this abomination of a bill.
Republican members of Congress who have said it will be a disaster in their states. Who have said it will force the closure of rural hospitals, and throw seniors out of nursing homes, in their states, because they will lose their Medicaid. Who have said they oppose the bill because it will add $3.3 trillion to the deficit, which young people will suffer for in years to come. They have said they oppose it because it pretends to help those earning tips and overtime, but close reading of the fine print shows it does practically nothing for them. But because their lips are firmly attached to Trump’s ass, they voted for it anyway. It is the biggest transfer of wealth from the poor to the rich in the country’s history. Now if that doesn’t give decent people the incentive they need to fight, to take back their country, nothing will. And when I say fight, I mean with their votes.
To win, Democrats need to stop the self-immolation. Democrats are doing fine across the nation. Winning many special elections for state legislatures and the judiciary. Even when they don’t win, the margins in solid Republican districts are way down. Democrats will win governorships in New Jersey and Virginia this year. So instead of Democrats constantly talking about how bad the polls are for the party, and trashing each other, they need to focus on what it will take to win back Congress in 2026. The best way to start is to trash Republicans. I am concerned about groups like David Hogg’s PAC, and figures like Sen. Bernie Sanders, supporting candidates against sitting Democrats. Spending money and time on primaries against sitting democrats, even old ones, may not be the way to go this cycle. We need one focus — taking back Congress in 2026. That means laser like focus on which seats are winnable; open seats, and Republican seats, in both the House and Senate. Doing this is the only way we can stop the felon in the White House, and his MAGA sycophants in Congress, from doing more damage in his final two years as president. Time to face reality, that is really all that can be done for now.
If Democrats take back the House, they can stop the budget machinations Trump is trying to get done. If Democrats take the Senate, they can stop the felon from getting any more MAGA judges, or disgusting unqualified executive branch nominees, confirmed. Again, that has to be the singular focus for 2026 for anyone serious about stopping Trump. I, too, want younger members of Congress. I would urge older Democrats, those in safe districts, to voluntarily step aside. But spending millions to primary them, when in most cases history shows they will win anyway, seems counterproductive at this time. Choose the best candidates in primaries for open and Republican seats — those with the best chance of winning in the general election. I have given my support at this time to Zach Wahls, running to unseat Sen. Joni Ernst in Iowa.
Democrats must remember that most of the voters in the nation are moderate and concerned with kitchen table issues. So, while there are districts far left candidates can win, like Mamdani who just won the mayoral primary in New York City, we have seen such candidates lose in most of the country. There are takeaways from Mamdani’s win in New York for every candidate, other than everyone likes things for free. I recommend candidates look at the brilliant way he used social media. That is something Democrats around the country need to learn. People, especially young people, get their news that way these days. Then Democrats must accept the midterm elections are really local elections. They will be about what the local Democratic candidate campaigns on, and the contrast to what the Republican Party is doing for, or in most cases to, the voters in that particular district.
If Democrats do anything nationally it should be to flood the airwaves with the negatives of Trump’s bill. If done right Democrats will win. Then stop trashing Democrats who don’t agree with you on every issue. Again, stop listening to the likes of Bernie Sanders, who tells people if they don’t like everything about a Democrat, they can vote for an independent. History tells us that only helps Republicans.
Understand the most important vote any legislator makes is their first one. It determines who will control the legislature. Who will be Speaker of the House, and Majority Leader in the Senate, and most state legislatures. If the vote is for the Democratic leadership, then Democrats control the agenda, and committees. That is how to make a real difference.
Stop listening to those who claim the Democratic Party is not clear on what it stands for. The Democratic platform has been clear for years. Democrats support equality, unions, working people, Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. They support the right of women to control their bodies; support equality for the LGBTQ community. Democrats are for a fair immigration policy; doing everything possible to fight climate change, and protect the environment; bringing down prices for groceries, gas, and rent. If Democrats take back control of committees, in both state legislatures, and Congress, they can once again begin to move forward on all those issues.
So, stop the self-immolation, and attack Republicans. They are the enemy of the people, not a Democrat who you may not agree with on every issue. Try to move forward as a united Democratic Party. If everyone understands and does that, Democrats will win in 2025 and 2026, and will stop the felon in the White House before he totally destroys our country.
Peter Rosenstein is a longtime LGBTQ rights and Democratic Party activist.
Opinions
USAID’s demise: America’s global betrayal of trust with LGBTQ people
Trump-Vance administration dismantled agency after taking office

The U.S. Agency for International Development — proudly my institutional home for several years of my international development career and an American institutional global fixture since November 1961 — is no more.
How will USAID’s closure impact LGBTQI+ people around the world, especially in poor, struggling countries (“the Global South”)? Time will tell, but “dire,” “appalling,” and “shameful” are appropriate adjectives, given the massive increase in HIV/AIDS deaths that follow the callous, abrupt, and unspeakably cruel cut-off of funding for USAID’s health and humanitarian programming in HIV/AIDS prevention, treatment, and care.
Regarding LGBTQI+ people and issues, USAID worked in a tough neighborhood. In Africa alone, more than 30 countries in which USAID had programming still criminalize same-sex relationships, often to the point of imposing the death penalty. These fiercely anti-LGBTQI+ countries share harsh anti-LGBTQI+ punishments with most countries in the Middle East and North Africa. Other countries where USAID formerly worked retain colonial-era sodomy laws.
Where did USAID fit into all this turbulence? The agency was not allowed to transgress local laws, so how could it support the human rights of local LGBTQI+ people? USAID did so by building close and trusting relationships with local LGBTQI+ civil society, and by “superpower advocacy” for the universal human rights of all people, including those of us in the queer community.
I served at USAID’s Africa Bureau under the Obama administration, becoming the only openly transgender political appointee in USAID’s history. In that role, I was privileged to have a platform that caught the astounded attention of both queer people and of anti-LGBTQI+ governments around the world. If the president of the United States can elevate a transgender woman to such a senior position within the U.S. government, that open declaration of acceptance, inclusion, worth, and recognition set a precedent that many in the LGBTQI+ community worldwide hoped their countries would emulate.
Serving as an openly queer person at USAID also afforded me the opportunity to meet with many fiercely anti-LGBTQI+ senior politicians and government officials from African countries who sought USAID funding. Uganda’s first woman speaker of the parliament, Rebecca Alitwala Kadaga and her whole delegation came to see me at USAID in Washington about such funding. I had some very frank (and USAID-approved) “talking points” to share with her and her team about President Obama’s strong and secular commitment to equal human rights for all people. My tense meeting with her was also an opportunity to educate her as to the nature of the transgender, nonbinary, and intersex community — we who are simply classified and discriminated against as “gay” people in Uganda and in most countries in the Global South. I also had the chance to represent USAID in the “inter-agency” LGBTQI+ human rights task team led by openly gay U.S. Ambassador David Pressman, whose effective leadership of that Obama-era initiative was inspirational.
Working closely with professional, capable, and caring USAID career employees such as Ajit Joshi and Anthony Cotton, and with the strong and open support of the USAID Deputy Administrator Don Steinberg, I helped to craft and promote USAID’s very first LGBTQI+ policy. Under President Obama, USAID also created the LGBT Global Development Partnership, a public-private partnership supporting LGBTQI+ civil society groups throughout the Global South. USAID funding also increased for programs promoting LGBTQI+ inclusion, anti-violence, and relevant human rights protections. This programming expanded further (albeit never adequately funded) during the Biden administration under the able leadership of USAID Senior LGBTQI+ Coordinator Jay Gilliam and his team.
So what did it all mean? Has USAID left a footprint for the global LGBTQI+ community? Will its absence matter?
In my view, that answer is an emphatic yes. International development and humanitarian response go to the heart of recognizing, respecting, and caring about universal human dignity. USAID converted those ethical commitments into tangible and meaningful action, again and again, and modelled for the world what it means to truly include all persons.
My time serving at USAID was a high point of my career, being surrounded by the best of American civil servants and foreign service officers. For me, “USAID Forever” remains my battle cry. Let’s start thinking of how we will rebuild it, beginning in three years.
Chloe Schwenke is a professor at Georgetown University’s McCourt School of Public Policy.
-
Federal Government3 days ago
Treasury Department has a gay secretary but LGBTQ staff are under siege
-
Virginia4 days ago
Defying trends, new LGBTQ center opens in rural Winchester, Va.
-
District of Columbia3 days ago
Gay GOP group hosts Ernst, 3 House members — all of whom oppose Equality Act
-
District of Columbia3 days ago
D.C. police seek public’s help in July 5 murder of trans woman