Connect with us

National

Queer Americans from N.M. to Philly on coping with Trump 2.0

Activists, immigration rights attorneys on the tough road ahead

Published

on

Tyrell Brown is executive director at Galaei QTBIPOC Social Justice and Founder and Program Director at Philly Pride 365.

I tried not to look at the clock this morning as I prepared to write. However, curiosity got me: Trump had been president for exactly nine minutes. Although his presence loomed so large in the vacuum of the four years between terms 45 and 47 that it doesn’t seem as if he ever really left. 

The question now is how we, as members of the LGBTQ community, will cope with the next four years. I live in the Four Corners area of New Mexico. The county of San Juan is rural and very red. My extended in-laws are mostly Trump supporters but, mercifully, the mutual gag order against discussing politics over Christmas was kept in place. 

At one such family party a woman asked if my partner and I knew her son Eric Domiguez. Had we still been in my native Philadelphia we probably would not have known this particular Eric based on sheer population. So at first it was a case of, “You’re the only gay men in the room. Do you know my gay son?” 

However, I did know him via Facebook and learned he’s related to my fiancé by marriage. Dominguez runs Alphabet Mafia Presents, a social group creating safe spaces for the queer community. He is also responsible for a queer-centric recovery group, Recovery Queers. Soon after the election the group addressed concerns.

Alphabet Mafia Presents, Recovery Queers and Sasha’s Rainbow of Hope collaborated to set up a queer town hall in November to address community concerns about local impacts of a second Trump presidency,” Dominguez shared. “It was open to the entire community and had the police LGBT liaison from Farmington police department on hand to answer questions. The event was put together in response to an incident that happened at a local barbershop where a queer individual overheard a conversation between two Trump supporters making comments about how they can’t wait for Trump to get rid of all the queer people in his second term. That conversation brought up a lot of fear for what could happen in our small conservative community.” 

Dominguez encountered people on social media in fear of what could happen, talking about leaving the country to find a safe space to exist, struggling with mental health issues, parents afraid for their trans children, and other topics. Interestingly, despite the small population of Farmington, N.M., they have had an LGBTQ police liaison since the aftermath of the Pulse nightclub massacre. 

“And coming soon,” Dominguez shared, “we’ll have The Gay Agenda Four Corners. A website, social media pages and weekly newsletter to promote all queer events and resources happening throughout the Four Corners.” 

As we have seen in our earlier history, from Stonewall to Anita Bryant, from ACT UP to marriage equality, LGBTQ people rally to take care of each other. Dominguez is concerned, as we all are, about Project 2025. But he takes solace in the people, groups, and events he works with locally. 

“I’m an openly gay man that hosts queer events in rural communities. And conservative friends praise me and have told me they think God sent me here to bring our community together through the work I do. So yeah I am scared of what could happen. But my experience here in our small conservative town has shown me that we can come together in spite of our differences. I know this isn’t the same for all small towns,” he cautions. “But we have groups like Equality New Mexico that have been working to make New Mexico a sanctuary state for queer and trans people. Laws passed over the last few years have made New Mexico one of the safest states for queer people to exist. I have seen first hand how existing as a queer person in small rural communities has influenced change. I can focus on fear. Or step outside my comfort zone, interact with people with different beliefs and grow together as a community. Either way the only way I’ll make it through the next four years is finding support in the community.”

Tim Rudy, a stay-at-home dad, and Brian Rudy, an events planner, are a married couple with two recently adopted sons living in Brian’s native Texas. Being in a very red state, do they fear for the future as a same-sex couple with two young children?

“I can’t say we have experienced any challenges as a same-sex couple or a same-sex parent unit, at least not outwardly. People in this state are typically friendly and offer hospitality, even if they do talk about you behind your back in that charming southern way. Because of the areas we have chosen to live and work and the friends we choose to surround ourselves with, I feel like we are pretty well insulated from some of the ugliness one can experience in a deep red state,” Tim shared. “That being said – though it hasn’t touched me I know friends who have experienced assaults and various targeted attacks even on the streets of vehemently liberal Austin.”

As for being gay parents, the Rudys say the boys have not experienced negativity at school. 

“They have fantastic support systems at school and Brian was a teacher for years so we are able to maneuver them into the most ideal learning environments. However, when our youngest was in daycare, Tim went to pick him up one day and a little girl ran up to him and started loudly asking why he had two dads. The easiest response to that is always that every family is going to look different. But this four-year-old was quite opinionated about the situation. Probably as a result of belief systems at home.”

Brian is the son of an Iranian refugee. He does not, however, feel threatened by Trump’s immigration crackdown.

“We are close with a number of people who this may directly affect in the local Persian community. Many Persians who fled Iran during the Iranian Revolution were forced to leave without their birth certificates and other identifying documentation (regardless of status or wealth) and that can present a major problem for them for obvious reasons,” Brian stated. 

“Xenophobia isn’t a problem for us,” Tim added. “Brian’s maternal family has been in Texas for generations.”

While my fiancé’s family kept the gag order in place at holiday parties, the Rudys were not so lucky at a recent gathering. 

“One issue that is unavoidable in this area is conservative friends and family,” Brian shared. “We were recently at a family party where an intoxicated family friend was shouting angrily about the democratic presidential candidate’s campaign, and when Tim engaged in order to discuss facts versus right-wing propaganda, the guest began berating Tim in front of the entire family and our children, which was unacceptable. Sadly, the host of the party, a close family member, chose not to apologize and instead explain that she ‘loves this country because we can all have our own beliefs.’”

Speaking of immigration issues, a talking point of both Trump and the shadowy figures behind Project 2025, I spoke to Joseph Best of Best & Associates, an immigration law group based in Philadelphia. Best has been practicing law since 2008. He says he became enamored with immigration law during an immigration clinic at Villanova University. As an immigration attorney he is eligible to practice in any state as immigration is a federal matter. He need only hold a license in one state to practice in any jurisdiction. And he does: His social media shows him in New York one day, or Maine, or Pennsylvania the next fighting for immigrants. Best has fought for several LGBTQ people to gain citizenship. 

“LGBT people generally have very viable asylum cases and often we get good results because so many countries are openly persecuting their LGBTQ+ citizens, often proudly so,” he said. “Asylum law in the U.S. has positively evolved over the past several decades to broadly support protections for LGBT people. Although, because our system is so broken and arbitrary, there are still some very bad immigration judges who refuse to follow the law and struggle to find a legal or factual basis as an excuse to not grant protection to our clients.”

As for Project 2025, Best says it is “nothing new … save for its own explicit announcement of their intentions to destroy America as a pluralistic representative, secular democracy. Of course, the biggest impact that their anti-LGBT agenda would have on immigration would be to restrict the application of asylum law for people fleeing anti-LGBT violence and harm and the efforts to undo legal progress in the states and federally around marriage equality and privacy rights more broadly. But thankfully all of that is complicated to actually implement and cannot happen overnight allowing for political opposition to get organized in response. Transgender people are today the easiest targets in our community to pick on. But it is an old playbook that anyone old enough who survived AIDS and our struggle for LGBT rights in the 80s and 90s will recognize immediately.”

Tyrell Brown is executive director at Galaei QTBIPOC Social Justice and Founder and Program Director at Philly Pride 365. According to their website, “Serving the Latinx community while widening our embrace, GALAEI now provides services, support and advocacy for all Queer, Trans, Indigenous and People of Color (QTBIPOC) communities.” The community they serve is historically more vulnerable due to socio-economic issues and other divides in Philadelphia. 

Brown has been active in Philly’s queer community for a long time. The Galaei organization is more than an office. It’s a vibrant community center nestled on a small street in the Fishtown section of the city. An area largely economically destroyed by the closing of manufacturing and fisheries – hence Fishtown – and one now increasingly vulnerable to recent gentrification displacing long-time residents. 

“As the executive director here,” Brown explained, “I have forecasted the potential of this for a year, while also driving home to the staff and those I encounter in the community that times will be difficult, and that we may not be able to anticipate every action, challenge, by the coming administration…but ensuring them that we are a resilient people and that we will navigate these challenging times.” 

They look forward to working with the community they serve and their organization’s programs will be focused on “legacy.” Galaei is ready to meet the needs of the community. Much like the queer town hall in Farmington, Brown has already fielded calls from the community, and had staff express their concerns about coping.

“We are working with a collective that offers group healing explicitly for our staff as part of our regular care routine bi-weekly, this will include meditation and group discussion related to our self-care.” Brown closed his discussion with me beautifully. 

“Understand that you are more powerful than you know and that the person that you are, who you know today, is not necessarily the person that you can be. Butterflies can’t see their own wings but they still know how to fly. The challenges that are sure to come tomorrow may not be what we anticipate, they may startle you, but know that we are prepared.”

I am very fortunate to know all of these charismatic people on a personal level. I dreaded writing this piece. Putting this article into words meant that we are no longer awaiting Trump’s return. We are now living in the second administration of a leader most LGBTQ people fear. However, we are overwhelmingly hopeful that we can and will overcome. 

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

Puerto Rico

The ‘X’ returns to court

1st Circuit hears case over legal recognition of nonbinary Puerto Ricans

Published

on

(Photo by Sergei Gnatuk via Bigstock)

Eight months ago, I wrote about this issue at a time when it had not yet reached the judicial level it faces today. Back then, the conversation moved through administrative decisions, public debate, and political resistance. It was unresolved, but it had not yet reached this point.

That has now changed.

Lambda Legal appeared before the 1st U.S. Court of Appeals in Boston, urging the court to uphold a lower court ruling that requires the government of Puerto Rico to issue birth certificates that accurately reflect the identities of nonbinary individuals. The appeal follows a district court decision that found the denial of such recognition to be a violation of the U.S. Constitution.

This marks a turning point. The issue is no longer theoretical. A court has already determined that unequal treatment exists.

The argument presented by the plaintiffs is grounded in Puerto Rico’s own legal framework. Identity birth certificates are not static historical records. They are functional documents used in everyday life. They are required to access employment, education, and essential services. Their purpose is practical, not symbolic.

Within that framework, the exclusion of nonbinary individuals does not stem from a legal limitation. Puerto Rico already allows gender marker corrections on birth certificates for transgender individuals under the precedent established in Arroyo Gonzalez v. Rosselló Nevares. In addition, the current Civil Code recognizes the existence of identity documents that reflect a person’s lived identity beyond the original birth record.

The issue lies in how the law is applied.

Recognition is granted within specific categories, while those who do not identify within that binary structure remain excluded. That exclusion is now at the center of this case.

Lambda Legal’s position is straightforward. Requiring individuals to carry documents that do not reflect who they are forces them into misrepresentation in essential aspects of daily life. This creates practical barriers, exposes them to scrutiny, and places them in a constant state of vulnerability.

The plaintiffs, who were born in Puerto Rico, have made clear that access to accurate identification is not symbolic. It is a basic condition for moving through the world without contradiction imposed by the state.

The fact that this case is now being addressed in the federal court system adds another layer of significance. This is not a pending policy discussion or a legislative proposal. It is a constitutional question. The analysis is not about political preference, but about rights and equal protection under the law.

This case does not exist in isolation.

It unfolds within a broader context in which debates over identity and rights have increasingly been shaped by the growing influence of conservative perspectives in public policy, both in the United States and in Puerto Rico. At the local level, this influence has been reflected in legislative discussions where religious arguments have begun to intersect with decisions that should be grounded in constitutional principles. That intersection creates tension around the separation of church and state and has direct consequences for access to rights.

Recognizing this context is not an attack on faith or religious practice. It is an acknowledgment that when certain perspectives move into the realm of public authority, they can shape outcomes that affect specific communities.

From within Puerto Rico, this is not a distant debate. It is a lived reality. It is present in the difficulty of presenting identification that does not match one’s identity, and in the consequences that follow in workplaces, schools, and government spaces.

The progression of this case introduces the possibility of change within the applicable legal framework. Not because it resolves every tension surrounding the issue, but because it establishes a legal examination of a practice that has long operated under exclusion.

Eight months ago, the conversation centered on ongoing developments. Today, there is already a judicial finding that identifies a violation of rights. What remains is whether that finding will be upheld on appeal.

That process does not guarantee an immediate outcome, but it shifts the ground.

The debate is no longer theoretical.

It is now before the courts.

Continue Reading

National

LGBTQ community explores arming up during heated political times

Interest in gun ownership has increased since Donald Trump returned to office

Published

on

Gun rights organizations and advocates say interest in gun ownership seems to have increased in the LGBTQIA+ community since President Donald Trump returned to the White House last year. (Photo by Kaitlin Newman for the Baltimore Banner)

By JOHN-JOHN WILLIAMS IV | As the child of a father who hunted, Vera Snively shied away from firearms, influenced by her mother’s aversion to guns.

Now, the 18-year-old Westminster electrician goes to the shooting range at least once a month. She owns a rifle and a shotgun, and plans to get a handgun when she turns 21.

“I want to be able to defend my community, especially being in political spaces and queer spaces,” said Snively, a trans woman. “It’s just having that extra line of safety, having that extra peace of mind would be important to me.”

Snively is among what some say is a growing number of LGBTQ gun owners across the United States. Gun rights organizations and advocates say interest in gun ownership appears to have increased in that community since President Donald Trump returned to the White House last year.

The rest of this article can be read on the Baltimore Banner’s website.

Continue Reading

Tennessee

Tenn. lawmakers pass transgender “watch list” bill

State Senate to consider measure on Wednesday

Published

on

Tennessee, gay news, Washington Blade
Image of the transgender flag with the Tennessee flag in the shape of the state over it. (Image public domain)

The Tennessee House of Representatives passed a bill last week to create a transgender “watch list” that also pushes detransition medical treatment. The state Senate will consider it on Wednesday.

House Bill 754/State Bill 676 has been deemed “ugly” by LGBTQ advocates and criticized by healthcare information litigators as a major privacy concern.

The bill would require “gender clinics accepting funds from this state to perform gender transition procedures to also perform detransition procedures; requires insurance entities providing coverage of gender transition procedures to also cover detransition procedures; requires certain gender clinics and insurance entities to report information regarding detransition procedures to the department of health.”

It would require that any gender-affirming care-providing clinics share the date, age, and sex of patients; any drugs prescribed (dosage, frequency, duration, and method administered); the state and county; the name, contact information, and medical specialty of the healthcare professional who prescribed the treatment; and any past medical history related to “neurological, behavioral, or mental health conditions.” It would also mandate additional information if surgical intervention is prescribed, including details on which healthcare professional made a referral and when.

HB 0754 would also require the state to produce a “comprehensive annual statistical report,” with all collected data shared with the heads of the legislature and the legislative librarian, and eventually published online for public access.

The bill also reframes detransitioning as a major focus of gender-affirming healthcare — despite studies showing that the number of trans people who detransition is statistically quite low, around 13 percent, and is often the result of external pressures (such as discrimination or family) rather than an issue with their gender identity.

This legislation stands in sharp contrast to federal protections restricting what healthcare information can be shared. In 1996, Congress passed the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, or HIPAA, requiring protections for all “individually identifiable health information,” including medical records, conversations, billing information, and other patient data.

Margaret Riley, professor of law, public health sciences, and public policy at the University of Virginia, has written about similar efforts at the federal level, noting the Trump-Vance administration’s push to subpoena multiple hospitals’ records of gender-affirming care for trans patients despite no claims — or proof — that a crime was committed.

It has “sown fear and concern, both among people whose information is sought and among the doctors and other providers who offer such care. Some health providers have reportedly decided to no longer provide gender-affirming care to minors as a result of the inquiries, even in states where that care is legal.” She wrote in an article on the Conversation, where she goes further, pointing out that the push, mostly from conservative members of the government, are pushing extracting this private information “while giving no inkling of any alleged crimes that may have been committed.”

State Rep. Jeremy Faison (R-Cosby), the bill’s sponsor, said in a press conference two weeks ago that he has met dozens of individuals who sought to transition genders and ultimately detransitioned. In committee, an individual testified in support of the bill, claiming that while insurance paid for gender-affirming care, detransition care was not covered.

“I believe that we as a society are going to look back on this time that really burst out in 2014 and think, ‘Dear God, What were we thinking? This was as dumb as frontal lobotomies,’” Faison said of gender-affirming care. “I think we’re going to look back on society one day and think that.”

Jennifer Levi, GLAD Law’s senior director of Transgender and Queer Rights, shared with PBS last year that legislation like this changes the entire concept of HIPAA rights for trans Americans in ways that are invasive and unnecessary.

“It turns doctor-patient confidentiality into government surveillance,” Levi said, later emphasizing this will cause fewer people to seek out the care that they need. “It’s chilling.”

The Washington Blade reached out to the American Civil Liberties Union of Tennessee, which shared this statement from Executive Director Miriam Nemeth:

“HB 754/SB 676 continues the ugly legacy of Tennessee legislators’ attacks on the lives of transgender Tennesseans. Most Tennesseans, regardless of political views, oppose government databases tracking medical decisions made between patients and their doctors. The same should be true here. The state does not threaten to end the livelihood of doctors and fine them $150,000 for safeguarding the sensitive information of people with diabetes, depression, cancer, or other conditions. Trans people and intersex people deserve the same safety, privacy, and equal treatment under the law as everyone else.”

Continue Reading

Popular