Politics
HRC’s Brandon Wolf reflects on Trump’s victory, path ahead for LGBTQ movement
He joined the Blade for a conversation on Rated LGBT Radio
Human Rights Campaign National Press Secretary Brandon Wolf and Washington Blade White House reporter Christopher Kane spoke with Rated LGBT Radio on Thursday, following Donald Trump’s victory over Vice President Kamala Harris.
They covered subjects ranging from the impact of anti-trans advertising by the former president’s campaign and other Republican candidates in down-ballot races to the future of the Democratic Party and what lies ahead for organizations in the LGBTQ movement.
Prior to joining HRC, Wolf served as press secretary for Equality Florida. A survivor of the 2016 Pulse nightclub shooting in Orlando, he is recognized for his work in LGBTQ advocacy, public speaking and media appearances, and his critically acclaimed 2023 memoir “A Place for Us.”
The conversation has been edited for length and clarity.
MODERATOR: What is the mood at HRC and what are leaders and staff saying?
BRANDON WOLF: Like millions of people, the folks at HRC are heartbroken. I know I can speak for myself in saying that I am most heartbroken for those who have had their humanity questioned for years by Donald Trump and the MAGA movement. I’m most heartbroken for those who have been in the crosshairs, who have seen their freedoms and rights stripped away in state after state, in places like Texas and Tennessee and Florida. I’m heartbroken for the families who have been terrorized by their political leaders for years because of the kind of environment that people like Donald Trump have created, and I’m heartbroken for all the people who aren’t sure what happens next, the people who’ve listened to Donald Trump’s words, who’ve seen the ads that he’s run, who’ve read through Project 2025 and are deeply concerned about what happens next for themselves and their families.
This is a really challenging time, and the obstacles we’re facing are incredibly difficult, but we’ve also been here before as a community. I think about our ancestors a lot. I think about when we were being beaten and brutally assaulted by police officers, we fought back at Stonewall, and birthed a movement when people were dying by the 1,000s of AIDS and leaders refused to acknowledge that pain and suffering. We fought back, we formed Act Up, and we brought ourselves to this moment in time where we have the opportunity to potentially end that epidemic in our lifetime. We have been in incredibly challenging circumstances before, and at every one of those moments, we’ve locked arms with each other. We’ve chosen to get through it together. We dared ourselves to imagine what’s possible when we finally overcome those hurdles, and at every one of those moments, we have been successful. We’ve made progress happen. So, I’m heartbroken by the results of the election, but I’m certainly not feeling broken today.
MODERATOR: What are you hearing from LGBTQ groups you’ve spoken with in terms of their reaction to the election?
CHRISTOPHER KANE: The remarks that we just heard from Brandon actually echo what I heard earlier from Kierra Johnson, who’s the president of the LGBTQ Task Force and Task Force Action Fund. She was saying how we have this rich history as a community of activism, and how brave our forebears have been and how many of our brothers and sisters lost their lives defending our rights.
Something that I think these advocacy groups will be thinking about is what the next administration might cost [them], in terms of their access to levers of power. To what extent is the Trump administration going to work with these groups? And that means kind of a change in strategy, because the focus becomes, you know, political organizing and a lot of the other work that’s so important that these groups are engaged in, right? You know, whether it’s going out into the field and helping people get, in our community, get exactly what they need, Whether it’s providing legal resources for folks, in light of what we’re going to see in terms of regulatory and legal changes over the next administration. So there’s just so much work to be done.
[Note: Johnson told the Blade that Task Force and the other movement groups had been “doing scenario planning for months” to prepare for all possible outcomes, and together are already “moving to implement different strategies in the communities that we’re working in.”]
MODERATOR: It seems the Trump campaign sought to divide the community between LGB people on one side and trans and nonbinary communities on the other. VP-elect J.D. Vance saying, for example, that the ‘normal gay guy’ vote would break in their favor.
WOLF: First, I’m loath to let J.D. Vance tell anybody what normal is supposed to be. But the truth is, the data does not bear out that they won any significant part of the LGBTQ+ community. Exit polls show that people in the community backed Harris over Donald Trump by a 70 point margin, 84 to 14. That margin is second only to Black women in support of Vice President Harris. So, the LGBTQ+ community continues to be a very reliable part of the Democratic coalition, and I think that is because of a couple of things: Number one, we understand what’s at stake. We understand what we have to lose in these elections. We understand what we’re up against in Donald Trump. And number two, in Kamala Harris and [her VP pick, Minnesota Gov.] Tim Walz, we had real champions for our community — career-long champions who were doing the work of equality even before that was, maybe, politically advantageous or easy for them to do. It was Kamala Harris who was performing some of the first same-sex marriages in California when the country was having a debate over whether or not we should be able to get married at all. It was Tim Walz who, in the late ’90s, as a football coach, was the sponsor of the Gay-Straight Alliance club at his high school.
So, I think you saw that drive turnout in the LGBTQ+ community. That number expands when you get into some of these highly competitive battleground states. In Arizona, equality voters, who are people who prioritize LGBTQ+ equality when deciding who to vote for, equality voters backed Democratic candidates by a 92 to seven margin. So, again, we’re talking about a community that understands what’s at stake, and really showed up in this election cycle.
The other thing I want to address is, you’re talking about the MAGA agenda of driving people apart from each other. This is the old playbook. This is the right-wing playbook that they use every single time. And it’s because the MAGA agenda is not one that is designed to bring people together. MAGA candidates and campaigns don’t have a vision for our country. They don’t fundamentally believe in a multi-racial, multi-generational democracy, and so the only thing they have to offer the American people is division, chaos and hate. They pit neighbors against each other. They turn one community against another. They dare us to build higher walls and taller fences, because so long as we’re fighting with each other, we won’t find the time or the resources to organize against them collectively. And so that is what they have to offer us, this agenda of chaos, division, and hate, and that is what they’ve been trying throughout the election cycle, instead of offering policy proposals to help people address the cost of housing or groceries, instead of offering offering real comprehensive conversations on immigration reform, for instance, they serve up hate and xenophobia and transphobia and general bigotry. So, I think we have to be wary of falling into that same trap.
We’re going to spend years dissecting the election and figuring out how to build a winning coalition moving forward, but I can tell you that scapegoating trans people in this moment is not going to help us build the path forward. I think at HRC, I can speak for us that you know our job is to be in community with those other organizations. We’ve already been having conversations throughout the election cycle with our progressive partners, people in the labor space, people in the immigrant rights space, people in the civil rights space, the voting rights space, certainly the reproductive freedom space and others. We have to keep those conversations going. We have to make sure that we’re building a plan and a strategy that organizes communities across issue areas, and ultimately, we’re going to have to be united. We have to be a united front in defense of democracy and freedom and our basic civil liberties.
KANE: As Brandon said, first of all, the exit polls show that this strategy of dividing communities didn’t work, and it should come as no surprise, because [Brandon is] exactly right — that’s not how to win. We’re much stronger together.
It’s only been, what, less than 48 hours, right, since the election was called? We still have to collect a lot of information, and there’s plenty of time for reflection and recrimination and everything else to figure out exactly what happened here. To the extent possible. But I think one thing worth probing is whether the spend by Republicans on anti-trans advertising had any effect. And I think that’s something that’s perhaps worth looking into and maybe examining what would be the best way to respond to those anti-trans commercials. Should the campaign have done more to address it directly? Should they have pivoted to an economic message and said, you know, Republicans want to focus on [going after trans people] at the expense of improving materially the lives of the American people? You know, there are a lot of directions you could take that, but I think it’s worth revisiting in the future when we have more information.
MODERATOR: At Equality Florida, you fought against the extreme anti-LGBTQ laws passed under Gov. Ron DeSantis (R). How should the community prepare for or respond to those policies if or when they are introduced at the federal level after Trump takes office?
WOLF: Project 2025 is horrifying, but it’s not all that surprising if you’ve been living its beta test for years, and people in places like Florida and Texas and Tennessee have indeed been living this beta test of Project 2025. I think the next steps come in phases in my mind. And I would say, we start with community. We have to take care of our people. I’ve been at several of these inflection points when bad legislation is passing and leaders are trafficking in dehumanizing language, and the first thing we do is is reach out to people and ask what they need. I know that that’s what we’re going to be doing at HRC. We’ve got some plans in place to be with community, gathering information, listening, hearing what folks need. We’ve already put out a number of mental health resources that people can get access to. So, in these really difficult moments, we have to start with community. I’ve been in some really dark moments in my life, and in those moments, I didn’t know that the next day was worth living for, but it was community that reminded me I had to get up and fight every single day. We’re going to need that community right now more than ever.
The second thing I would say is we have the same rights today as we did when polls closed on Tuesday. In fact, we have the same congressional makeup today as we did when polls close on Tuesday. And there’s work to be done so long as we have control over the White House [and] a pro-equality majority in the Senate. There are things that we can do. I know that we’re having conversations internally with the administration to see where we can safeguard and shore up people’s access to freedoms and rights. We’ve got to do that work during the lame duck session.
And finally, I think we have work to do once Donald Trump is inaugurated. We’re going to have to work with Congress to try to blunt some of the attacks that will come through the legislative branch. We’re going to have to work with governors and state legislatures to try to safeguard people’s freedoms and protections on the state level. And we’re going to have to work with our foundation, our educational programs, to change the culture, to humanize people. So often we can get lost in the political rancor. People become talking points. It’s our job to put human faces and stories behind the policies that we’re debating, and we’re going to have to do that — whether it’s, you know, in classrooms, talking to young people about the kind of future they want for themselves and their peers, or whether it’s workplaces, challenging companies to make their values more than just a dusty poster on a wall, but living, breathing values that make people’s lives fundamentally better. So, it’s going to take a whole of organization, a whole-of-community approach, to resist Donald Trump, but I don’t want us to skip past the part where we we take care of each other first for a second.
MODERATOR: Reactions to Delaware State Sen. Sarah McBride’s victory in her race for the state’s at-large seat in the U.S. House, which distinguishes her as the first transgender candidate elected to Congress?
WOLF: You’re spot on when you’re talking about the power that Sarah has, and I don’t want to lose that. You know, Tuesday was a rough night in the presidential, and certainly did not go the way we wanted it to in other races, but we can’t lose sight of the historic wins that we got either. Sarah McBride’s victory is groundbreaking for people. There are trans kids out there who are wondering whether or not this country loves them, who will look up and see Sarah McBride’s face on a television screen and believe that they can be whoever they want to be. That really matters. When we say representation matters, that’s what representation really looks like.
And when you’re talking about the story that Sarah tells just by walking the halls or or giving speeches from the floor, don’t forget that Sarah did not just win this race for Congress. She dominated in the primary field because of her record of service. She cleared that field very early on. Adnd then in the general election, she garnered the highest support among any other Democrat running in Delaware, except for one, the insurance commissioner. We’re going to have to dissect how that happened. But, you know, we’re talking about Sarah McBride getting more votes, you know, than folks running for governor and for Senate. So Sarah is a gravitational pull right now in Delaware politics, she is a groundbreaking win for the community, and it matters that she got there by being an incredibly talented champion for her constituents.
And so, to answer your question, yes, we have to tell the story of why Sarah McBride’s race is historic, why her serving is groundbreaking. And we have to tell the story of how Sarah got there, that she got there by doing really good, hard, work. By connecting with her constituents. By delivering results for people every single day. That’s what it looks like to be successful. And when we tell those full, rich stories of all that people are, that’s when we see them as human, right?
I think we can do such a better job in the media and in digital social media spaces [of] telling the rich fullness of people’s lives. I want to hear the stories of the trans business owners. The trans parents. I want to hear the story of the trans woman who just graduated from law school. I want to hear those rich, full stories, and that’s how we chart a new path.
KANE: I agree with everything Brandon said. You know, I’ll add that when I interviewed President Biden at the end of September, one of the things we talked about was Sarah McBride. And he said something, I wish I had the exact words in front of me, but it was something like, ‘Sarah’s going to be, I pray to God, a member of Congress.’ And I think he understood and understands and was communicating just the unbelievable power of having a transgender woman serving in the United States Congress, and everything that that means.
And it’s not, of course, just that she’s elected and is serving there, but it’s the work that she’s going to be doing when she gets there. And, you know, Sarah is the real deal. She’s so widely respected and for her work, I mean, as a state senator in Delaware, she was very effective in securing a bill that provided paid family leave for people in Delaware. So, she’s just been very effective, and, again, very widely respected.
MODERATOR: The Trump-Vance administration will bring an influx of insiders — lobbyists, staffers, attorneys, advisers — to Washington. When contending with new policies concerning LGBTQ rights, how critical will it be to work with those folks, and what does that look like?
KANE: I just had a conversation with a senior employee at a federal government agency, and I was asking her about what the transition process looks like. I’ve never covered a presidential transition, but the process is more or less consistent and tends to work in the same way each time. You have folks that are eager to make their ins and make inroads at various agencies, and they have their eye on various jobs.
And then there’s a lot of, I think especially with this crowd, frankly, a lot of people knifing each other. There are warring factions. Also so that’s something that we need to understand, like within the Republican Party and even within Trump’s closest group of aides, there was conflict. A lot of conflict. So, ultimately, yes, of course, like it comes down to the people that are really effectuating these policies and and also the question, of course, of how effective they can be, especially where there’s a lot of dysfunction. And I think we can probably expect to see — as much as we’ve been promised that this administration is going to be a lot smoother, and he knows what he’s doing this time — I think based on the reporting about how his campaign went, that we can expect a lot of dysfunction.
WOLF: I will cosign that and say, you know, one of the things that people warned about Trump’s Project 2025 plan all along was this idea of purging the federal government and replacing dedicated career public servants with Trump acolytes. And what that would mean for those levers of power, right? You think about people like Stephen Miller and Steve Bannon and the devastating impact they had the first time, you can just imagine a federal, you know, government full of people like Stephen Miller and Steve Bannon, with very few people there to act as a check and a balance.
Your second point is so important to me, Chris, which is about dysfunction. When you put unqualified, incompetent people in important positions, then systems and structures break down, right? You’re talking about putting Elon Musk in charge of anything — I’m not sure he knows how government works, and it concerns me that he would be overseeing large government agencies that have complicated functions that impact people’s daily lives. You’re talking about some of these other people that just have no background in public administration. They don’t know how these agencies are supposed to function, and you’re putting them in positions because they’re a pal or they’re a yes man. That’s incredibly dangerous, that the federal government plays a critical role in people’s everyday lives, and putting incompetent people in these positions could do real damage.
KANE: And it’s even hard when they put people in there that are really competent, because — this is part of the conversation I was having earlier today — it’s even hard for the most qualified people, because it is such a short timeframe to learn everything about the way the institution is run, whether it’s the Justice Department, State Department, or whatever. [New appointees and officials have to learn] everything from where the bathrooms are and how many employees are there to, you know, what are the active investigations that the outgoing administration is going to put in your hands? So you can imagine that having somebody in there that doesn’t know what they’re doing. I mean, you can imagine, right?
MODERATOR: How are LGBTQ movement organizations looking at the threat posed by Trump’s appointment of more judges on the federal bench?
WOLF: We’ve seen the devastating impact, not just on the Supreme Court level, but across the judiciary of Trump stacking the court system with his acolytes and, again, sometimes it is incompetence. We saw that with the judge down in Florida, where she just didn’t really know the basic functions of the job, and clearly had been put there to help influence cases in a direction that someone like Donald Trump might like.
And then, you know, you look at some things that are maybe more sinister, which is this bench of candidates that organizations like the Heritage Foundation and the Alliance Defending Freedom have groomed for these positions to use their roles as judges to reshape the United States of America legally and culturally. We saw the impact of that, obviously, most infamously with the Dobbs v. Jackson decision that overturned Roe v Wade. There, you had these candidates who had been hand picked and groomed through the system, through the right wing system, who got up there, lied to the Senate committee, said that Roe v Wade was decided precedent, that there would be no reason to go back on that kind of precedent. Yet [they were confirmed and seated] and immediately [went] after Roe v Wade protections and precedent.
We’re in a very precarious position with a President Donald Trump and a Senate majority who could further stack the judiciary. And then you look at the threat on the Supreme Court. There’s a very real possibility that he could, you know, harass one or two justices into leaving and replace them with 40-year-old candidates that have been groomed and hand picked and cement a conservative majority on the Supreme Court for a very long time to come. So I think that’s why people named, in the beginning, the threat that Trump posed to the courts. That’s why it was a part of people’s pitch during the election cycle. And we’re up against some real challenges with him nominating judges.
KANE: I’m nodding in agreement. Kevin Jennings, the CEO of Lambda Legal, made the point recently that if she serves as long as Ruth Bader Ginsburg did, [Trump-appointed] Justice Amy Coney Barrett would leave the court in, I think he said, 2049. We’re talking like generational impact in terms of the rightward shift of the judiciary that we’re going to see in the next administration.
The [incoming] Trump administration is expected to be able to appoint, I believe, roughly as many judges as the Biden administration did, and as many as the [first] Trump administration did. I believe the first Trump administration also perhaps set a record — or, if not, came close — in the number of judges on the federal bench that they appointed. So we’re about to see massive, massive changes throughout the country. And, you know, it really matters who these judges are. They’re deciding things that affect our everyday lives for people across the United States.
MODERATOR: How are the LGBTQ movement organizations thinking about the makeup of the federal judiciary in the context of their legal strategy following Trump’s inauguration?
WOLF: I don’t want to get ahead of our legal team on what potential litigation tactics might look like, but I will say they know the law really well. They’re very savvy about understanding the ways in which discriminatory policies violate the law. They’re really good at helping to tell that story in courtrooms across the country, and every case is very different. So it is likely that there will be a lot of strategizing in the months and years to come.
MODERATOR: Over the past few years, a number of Democratic governors have made refuge for trans people who live in other (redder) states that have anti-trans laws and healthcare restrictions on the books. This week, many of those same governors pledged to resist a number of the incoming administration’s proposed policies. Where does that leave LGBTQ folks?
WOLF: We can’t deny that that’s happening to people, that they have been forced from their homes. I know plenty of people that I love and care about a lot who have made the really difficult decision to leave their homes. There was a trans woman that I used to work with in Florida who. through tears, called me one day and said, ‘if you see a GoFundMe on my Facebook page, it’s so that I can save enough to rent a U-Haul, put all my stuff in it, and I’ll just drive until I find somewhere that’s safer.’ Those kinds of stories are heartbreaking, and they’re already happening around this country. Trans people are made into refugees in their own states.
And I also think we can’t lose sight of the fact that some people just can’t do that, right? It’s too complicated for them to move. Maybe they’re taking care of a family member, or they have kids that are enrolled in school, or they can’t afford it. Maybe they’re in a home that their families had for generations, and they don’t want to leave it behind. People deserve to be treated with dignity and respect they deserve to have their humanity respected in their home. That’s what I get so passionate about, is that people should not be forced — in order to get the basics, the fundamental freedoms that they deserve simply on the basis of being a human being.
It’s going to be our job to, one. help to expand protections [for trans people that were passed in some blue states]. Minnesota is a great example. Under Governor Walz’s leadership, they’ve become a refuge for people who are seeking health care access. It’s going to be our job to help support those states and expand their footprint to give people as many options as possible, and it’s going to be our job to help get resources and support to people who are in states where they are facing the highest hurdles.
MODERATOR: Trump has promised to disband the U.S. Department of Education. He and his allies support anti-LGBTQ curriculum restrictions, book bans, etc. What are your concerns with the incoming administration’s approach to education?
WOLF: Project 2025 is a 900+-page manifesto of terrifying things, and this might be one of the most terrifying among them, which is the complete dismantling of our public education system. Just for reference for folks, as a society, we’ve decided that education K through 12 is a right, and that everyone should be able to have access to it, because it helps us build a better society together, that young people deserve to be able to go to school to get an education so they can go out and be the thriving adults they deserve to be.
The MAGA agenda stands in opposition to that idea that everyone should have access to education in that way, and it is in part because education poses a threat to the MAGA agenda. The more people know about who we are as a country and who we’ve been, the more they ask questions about who we want to be in the future. The more access they have to different kinds of communities and different lived experiences. The more compassionate they are to those lived experiences.
And MAGA can’t have that. Their agenda, again, is built on division and chaos and hate, and so they work to dismantle the education system. They work to influence young people by destroying their access to one of their most fundamental rights in this country. Dismantling the Department of Education would be disastrous for people, and I want people to maybe consider what it would mean for folks in everyday life. Schools are not just a place to learn, they’re a place where young people are for long periods of the day. Everything that they interact with while they’re at school impacts who they grow up to be. And families rely on schools to keep their kids safe, to make sure their kids are treated with dignity and respect, to make sure they get a good education. So disrupting the education system in this country would be absolutely devastating for families all over the place, and especially so for LGBTQ+ young people, many of whom don’t have a safe space outside of the classroom where they spend so many hours of the day.
MODERATOR: What is your advice for LGBTQ people, including young queer and trans people, who are worried?
KANE: As a journalist, I am poorly positioned to answer such a question, especially relative to someone in the advocacy or political organizing space, or someone with experience in social work and mental health. It’s not an easy question. I would encourage folks to look out for their personal welfare and the welfare of their families and friends, to lean on other people, and to avail themselves of the resources provided by LGBTQ movement groups like HRC.
WOLF: Especially for trans and non binary folks, things feel really daunting, for good reason. As someone who’s been on the front lines in Florida before and has seen these things firsthand, the first thing I would recommend is feel all the feelings. I have routines on days where I’m feeling all the feelings. Everybody has their routine, but you have to allow yourself to feel it. Sometimes the temptation is to bury yourself in work or to become numb to it, or try to tell yourself that your feelings aren’t valid or that you’re overreacting, but you have to feel all the feelings.
And the second thing is what Chris said, which is to lean on people around you. As I mentioned, I’ve been through some pretty dark times in my own journey, and on the days where I wasn’t sure that tomorrow was worth waking up for, it was the little things. It was somebody offering a shoulder to cry on. It was the woman at Publix who offered a hug even though she didn’t know what I was going through. It was the woman at the bank who offered me a tissue when I couldn’t stop crying. It was the person at a vigil who wrapped their arms around me and told me that I was loved exactly as I am. It was that sense of community that reminded me that every day is worth getting up and fighting for. We’re going to need that community in this moment. So feel all the feels. And then, as Chris said, lean into each other, do everything you can to care for each other. We’ve been through dark times. We’re in dark times again. And we’ve gotten through them before, but only together.
Politics
Log Cabin Republicans remove transgender rights from mission
Decision made after ‘significant discussion’ with members, board
Log Cabin Republicans, an organization that formerly represented LGBTQ conservatives, has removed advocating for transgender and queer rights from its “renewed” national advocacy focus.
In an opinion piece written by Log Cabin Republicans President Ross Hemminger for the conservative media outlet Town Hall, he announced that trans rights would no longer be part of what the organization advocates for through conservative leadership and candidates.
In his piece, Hemminger wrote that after “significant discussion” with members and Log Cabin Republicans’ board of directors, the organization’s leadership voted to “refine Log Cabin Republicans’ national advocacy focus to concentrate specifically on issues of sexual orientation and conservative values,” a focus that does not include trans people.
“We have fought for the right to legally marry who we love, serve our country and our communities openly and proudly, and to enjoy the same inalienable rights afforded to all law-abiding Americans — and we succeeded,” Hemminger wrote. “However, the new era of gender identity politics is not the movement we supported and fought for. Gay men and women are losing public support across the country, and support for gay marriage and other once-widely accepted rights is eroding. Why? Because many voters today weren’t alive or cognizant of the politics of gay marriage winding its way through the courts and gaining ground in public opinion. Their view of the gay community is based on today’s radical transgender activists with their unnecessary and discomfiting focus on America’s youth.”
Hemminger then went on to argue that trans advocacy has shifted to focusing primarily on minors — a characterization that does not reflect the breadth of issues trans advocates address.
“They push schools to teach radical gender ideology; they want biological men in women’s sports regardless of the consequences; perhaps most offensively, they support gender reassignment treatments for minors, often without the knowledge or consent of the parents, knowing full well these treatments are mostly irreversible,” he wrote.
Hemminger and many right-wing political leaders have continued to assert this false reality as fact.
A Harvard-affiliated study found approximately 2.1 gender-affirming surgeries occur per 100,000 trans and gender-diverse minors diagnosed with gender dysphoria, underscoring how uncommon these procedures are among minors. In addition to the option of surgery for those who think it’s right for them, there is an array of other medically sound options to treat gender dysphoria, which according to KFF, an independent source for health policy research and polling, includes “medical, surgical, mental health, and non-medical services for transgender and nonbinary people.”
Additionally trans advocacy is not as narrow as Hemminger makes it seem in his opinion piece.
There are a slew of issues the trans community faces — and fights for — on a daily basis that have nothing to do with healthcare. Those include obtaining government documents that accurately reflect one’s gender identity, multiple elements of family law that include the right to marry and adopt children as straight couples can, protections from violence, hate crime protections, the right to serve in the military, access to bathrooms corresponding with their gender, and the right to education.
Despite the overwhelming number of issues trans people — regardless of political affiliation — have to struggle with as a result of systemic gaps in protections that are supposed to be afforded to everyone under the law, they remain vulnerable to unequal treatment.
Despite this shift, Log Cabin Republicans has committed to standing with the Republican Party rather than LGBTQ people as a whole. The organization was initially founded as a loosely connected network of local California social clubs made up of LGBTQ conservatives in the late 1970s before eventually emerging as a national political organization in the early 1990s under its founding executive director, Rich Tafel.
As the organization continued to gain momentum, it endorsed a handful of Republicans who voted against the Respect for Marriage Act, the 2022 law that federally recognized marriage equality for same-sex couples.
The Washington Blade reached out to Log Cabin Republicans for comment but did not hear back by the time of publication.
White House
Trump-Vance administration’s LGBTQ brain drain: what you need to know
Several high profile figures have left government since January 2025
Uncloseted Media published this article on Aug. 21.
By SPENCER MACNAUGHTON and HOPE PISONI | Since President Donald Trump regained office in January 2025, he and his administration have waged an all-out war against the LGBTQ community.
This has led queer Americans to move to other countries at unprecedented rates — Rainbow Railroad, a Canadian nonprofit that supports LGBTQ asylum seekers, reported receiving a huge increase in inquiries from the U.S. last year.
The same pattern is playing out within the government. And it’s leading to a brain drain of competent queer employees and allies who are either resigning or being fired, often because of their LGBTQ identity or their belief that queer people deserve basic human rights.
Here are six examples of federal workers who had a messy exit from Trump 2.0:
Demetre Daskalakis
- WHAT HE DID: Dr. Daskalakis is one of the foremost LGBTQ health professionals in the U.S. Under Trump’s first term, he was appointed director of the Division of HIV/AIDS Prevention at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Under Biden, he also served as the deputy response coordinator for mpox at the White House.
- WHAT HAPPENED: While he continued a lot of this work under Trump 2.0, he didn’t last long. In August 2025, he resigned from the CDC, writing in his resignation letter that he was “unable to serve in an environment that treats CDC as a tool to generate policies and materials that do not reflect scientific reality and are designed to hurt rather than to improve the public’s health.”
- BOTTOM LINE: I recently interviewed Daskalakis, where he told me that leadership from RFK Jr.’s Health and Human Services Department justified HIV cuts by saying the virus is “just too woke.”
Julia Curlee
- WHAT SHE DID: Julia Curlee worked in intelligence for nearly two decades between the CIA and the National Security Council. Earlier this week, she wrote an article in The Atlantic explaining how she had served as Mike Pence’s daily briefer and the NSC’s director for intelligence programs. During Trump 1.0, she briefed the president on Air Force One.
- WHAT HAPPENED: Curlee told CNN this week that in Trump’s second term, her treatment by the federal government transformed. She was no longer allowed to use the women’s bathroom on federal property and had to leave her workplace to relieve herself. Her passport was also reissued to read “male,” which led to complications when traveling abroad. In March 2025, less than 70 days into Trump’s second term, Curlee says she received a call while at a rib joint in Virginia with her family informing her that her White House tour was over and that they couldn’t tell her why. She continued to work for the CIA for some months, but she later resigned.
- BOTTOM LINE: Curlee wrote that moments after she learned she was fired from the White House, she saw a post from right-wing political activist Laura Loomer that read “A transgender, Biden holdover who hates President Trump is still working in the NSC intel office. I’m told there are several NSC staffers who have complained that this trans Biden holdover hasn’t been fired yet, but nothing is being done about it.”
Marc Seawright
- WHAT HE DID: Marc Seawright worked for more than eight years at the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Most recently, he served as the EEOC’s director of information governance and strategy, where he oversaw tech policy to help combat workplace harassment and discrimination.
- WHAT HAPPENED: During Trump 2.0, Seawright was ordered to develop technology that would erase any mention of LGBTQ identities from EEOC outreach materials. “[My expertise] was being leveraged to perpetuate discrimination against people like me,” he told the Associated Press. In that article, Seawright and other transgender and gender nonconforming federal employees described their “fear, grief, frustration, and distress working for the federal government at a time when it rejects them — often with no clear path for recourse or support.”
- BOTTOM LINE: Seawright quit in June, citing a hostile work environment. “It became overwhelming. It felt insurmountable,” he told the AP. He has now hired lawyers at Katz Banks Kumin and has filed a discrimination complaint.
David Maltinsky
- WHAT HE DID: Until 2025, Maltinsky worked for more than 16 years at the FBI as an intelligence specialist. In 2025, he was training to become a special agent, but three weeks ahead of graduation, he was fired.
- WHAT HAPPENED: On Oct. 1, he was delivered a letter from FBI Director Kash Patel informing him that he was being fired for an “inappropriate display of political signage.” The signage in question, according to Maltinsky, was a Pride flag displayed in his work station at a previous post in Los Angeles. The flag had been given to him by the FBI’s LA Field Office, and Maltinsky says he had been told by multiple supervisors that displaying it would not be a violation.
- BOTTOM LINE: Maltinsky is currently suing the FBI and the Department of Justice, arguing that his firing constituted unlawful discrimination.
Mary Brinkmeyer
- WHAT SHE DID: Brinkmeyer had been working as a psychologist for the Department of Veterans Affairs since 2008. She held multiple leadership roles, including the LGBTQ veteran care coordinator at the Hampton VA Medical Center. She established the first military support group for trans servicemembers and was awarded Navy Psychology Civilian Psychologist of the Year in 2016.
- WHAT HAPPENED: Following an early Trump executive order directing the federal government to purge any practices promoting “gender ideology,” Brinkmeyer says staff at her workplace were told to remove all LGBTQ-affirming materials from both public and private areas, as well as to identify “anything in medical records, training materials, or patient resources that could be considered ‘gender ideology.’” When she refused to comply and confronted her supervisor, she says her concerns were dismissed.
- BOTTOM LINE: Brinkmeyer resigned in February 2025, stating that she “didn’t want to be complicit in something that I knew was wrong.”
Amy Paris
- WHAT SHE DID: Paris was the second-highest ranking trans woman in the federal government, serving as a deputy digital services lead in the HHS Department, where she oversaw the safety of organ donations. Prior to that, she worked in a number of tech-related roles across the federal government since the Bush administration. She helped create cross-agency spending trackers, streamlined unemployment insurance during the pandemic and implemented trans-inclusive policies like gender-neutral passports.
- WHAT HAPPENED: Paris was fired as part of a string of mass layoffs across the federal government in February 2025. While the HHS did not publicly comment on why she was fired, Paris says she was told it was because of her performance, despite the fact that she got a 4.75 out of five on her last performance review and was praised for her work by multiple Biden administration officials.
- BOTTOM LINE: Paris told the 19th she suspected her firing was politically motivated, saying the Trump administration is “trying to sow discord and disrupt confidence in the workings of the federal government.”
White House
White House targets gender-affirming care funding, states fight back
Attorneys general from Md. and elsewhere are fighting directives
The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services announced last week that federal funding could no longer be used to pay for gender-affirming care through Medicaid or the Children’s Health Insurance Program.
The rule prohibits federal Medicaid dollars from covering puberty blockers, hormone therapy, and rare instances of surgery for enrollees under the age of 18 in the Medicaid program and under the age of 19 in CHIP. It does not prohibit coverage of counseling or psychotherapy as part of gender-affirming care.
The decision to restrict what healthcare is covered by federal dollars is part of a longer, more aggressive stance the Trump-Vance administration is taking toward LGBTQ healthcare.
Since taking the White House back for his second term, Trump has signed three executive orders that directly target transgender Americans. They include Executive Order 14168, “Defending Women From Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government” that requires the federal government to recognize only a person’s sex at birth, not their gender identity; Executive Order 14183, “Prioritizing Military Excellence and Readiness,” which attempts to remove transgender service members from the military and prevent them from enrolling; and an executive order that helped spur this change by restricting gender-affirming care.
The administration’s choice to villainize gender-affirming care, despite it being considered a best medical practice recommended by nearly every major medical group for gender dysphoria or gender incongruence, including the American Medical Association, American Academy of Pediatrics, and American Psychological Association, comes as KFF, a source for health policy research and polling data, estimates about 130,000 young trans people with Medicaid or CHIP coverage could be impacted by the policy.
“Today, we are ending federal taxpayer funding for sex-rejecting procedures on children,” U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., said last week when announcing the change. “These interventions carry serious risks and can cause irreversible harm. The federal government will no longer use Medicaid and CHIP dollars to fund procedures that fail to meet the evidentiary standard our children deserve.”
“Children deserve our protection, not experimental interventions that pose serious risks and convey no proven benefits,” said CMS Administrator Mehmet Oz. “By cutting off federal funds for these sex-rejecting procedures, we’re following the science, saving taxpayer dollars, and, most importantly, protecting children from potentially irreversible harm so they can truly flourish.”
The administration’s push is having a chilling effect on state healthcare legislation — more states now prohibit gender-affirming care than ever before. States with gender-affirming care restrictions jumped from four in 2023 to 27 states today.
The funding change has been met with fierce pushback from LGBTQ advocates, health experts, and government officials across the country before the rule goes into effect.
Some of the first actions against this policy began in July 2025.
Twenty-one states have attempted to restrict this effort in some fashion from going through as the White House intends. They include Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Mexico, New Jersey, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, and Wisconsin, as well as Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro on behalf of his state.
The coalition of attorneys general filed lawsuits challenging nine separate provisions of the final rule, arguing that they would make it harder for consumers to get coverage through the ACA, increase costs for states, and weaken key ACA protections.
The U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts on Aug. 15 struck down a key provision of a Trump-Vance administration final rule that would have excluded coverage of certain types of gender-affirming care as essential health benefits under the Affordable Care Act. Essential health benefits are subject to the ACA’s financial protections, including limits on out-of-pocket costs.
“Everyone deserves access to health coverage,” said California Attorney General Rob Bonta. “The Trump administration tried to exclude gender-affirming care from qualifying as an essential health benefit. We fought back, and the court’s ruling means this care can — and in many states must — qualify for the ACA’s financial protections, ensuring transgender people have an equal opportunity to benefit from the ACA.”
“The Trump administration tried to make essential care unaffordable for transgender Marylanders by stripping it out of the ACA’s cost protections,” said Maryland Attorney General Anthony Brown. “We fought to keep that care covered, and we won. My Office will always defend Marylanders’ right to the care they need.”
The final rule at issue — the “Marketplace Integrity and Affordability” rule — was proposed by the Trump-Vance administration in March 2025, purportedly to “curb ACA enrollment fraud” and reduce federal spending on subsidies that help consumers afford ACA coverage. Among other changes, the rule would have removed certain types of gender-affirming care from the ACA’s 10 essential health benefit categories.
“This president would rather target young people than lower costs or expand access to health care. It is reprehensible that our federal government is intent on hurting and isolating the adolescents it is supposed to protect. I will use every tool at my disposal to fight this proposal and protect transgender Americans and their families,” said New York Attorney General Letitia James in December after the policy was announced.
In addition to state government resistance to the change, multiple LGBTQ advocates have committed to protecting the right to healthcare for LGBTQ children.
Rocky Mountain Equality CEO Mardi Moore affirmed those in Colorado would continue to help people most at risk if the change goes through.
“First, to the families impacted by this news: you will not be cut off immediately. The rule takes effect Oct. 13, 2026, and providers can continue to bill Medicaid and CHIP for youth already receiving gender-affirming care for up to six months after that. Rocky Mountain Equality is here, and we can help you understand your options to continue your child’s care.
“This is discrimination dressed up as rule-making. Government healthcare policy should expand what people can access, not strip away care that families and doctors have already determined is medically necessary,” Moore added. “We’ve seen this pattern before with other kinds of essential care, and it rarely stops with just one restriction. Any effort to ban or limit care opens the door for more restrictions on more kinds of care.”
The Human Rights Campaign, the largest LGBTQ lobbying group in the U.S., issued multiple statements following the announcement, and has filed a similar lawsuit against the federal government for prohibiting gender-affirming care to federal employees using federal health plans.
HRC President Kelley Robinson said taking a hard stance against what the administration is presenting as a win for the American people that will ultimately restrict healthcare options for thousands of Americans.
“Every young person is entitled to the health care that they, their parents, and their medical providers agree that they need, without politicians interfering with these important and highly personal decisions. And yet, rather than working to make healthcare more affordable and accessible, the Trump administration continues to obsess over the healthcare needs of trans youth, this time by cutting off health insurance coverage for those who rely on Medicaid and CHIP to access that care,” Robinson said. “The Trump administration is terrorizing trans youth and their families with these kinds of actions, and it has to stop.”
-
Russia5 days agoRussian LGBTQ rights group to shut down
-
Virginia4 days agoWinsome Earle-Sears ‘Life and Marriage Tour’ to include Northern Va. stops
-
White House4 days agoWhite House targets gender-affirming care funding, states fight back
-
Celebrity News4 days agoMadonna nominated for 11 MTV VMAs
