Connect with us

Politics

Rising political violence raises safety questions for LGBTQ candidates, officeholders

Victory Fund President and CEO Evan Low shared how his groups are handling it

Published

on

Evan Low, president and CEO of the The LGBTQ+ Victory Fund and the LGBTQ+ Victory Institute. (Washington Blade file photo by Michael Key)

A study published in January 2024 by the Brennan Center for Justice found that America is experiencing a surge in political violence not seen since the assassinations of the 1960s, noting the insurrection at the U.S. Capitol, the attempted murder of Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi’s (D-Calif.) husband by a hammer wielding assailant, the shooting of Republican U.S. Rep. Steve Scalise and Republican colleagues at the annual Congressional Baseball Game, and threats against members who opposed U.S. Rep. Jim Jordan’s (R-Ohio) bid for House speaker.  

Since the report was issued, there were other high-profile incidents including two attempts on President Donald Trump’s life, an arson fire set with molotov cocktails at the home of Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro (D), and the murder and attempted murder of Democratic lawmakers in Minnesota by a suspect who allegedly kept lists of dozens of other elected officials and public figures. 

While the spike in violence and intimidation has been felt across the board, the Brennan Center stressed that “surveys and interviews revealed important variations among officeholders’ experiences,” with “Abuse directed at women, people of color, religious minorities, and LGBTQ+ individuals in office often convey[ing] misogynistic, racist, religious, or homophobic hate.”

According to a growing body of reports from civil rights groups and law enforcement agencies, anti-LGBTQ rhetoric and legislation, particularly aimed at trans and nonbinary people, has emboldened extremist activity and heightened the risks for those serving in public life or running for office. The trends map onto the broader population-wide increases in hate violence and intimidation based on sexual orientation or gender identity. 

At the same time, advocates say LGBTQ representation in public life is especially important as the community’s rights and freedoms are under assault. 

For an insider’s view into the considerations at play for candidates and officeholders, earlier this month the Washington Blade spoke with Evan Low, president and CEO of the The LGBTQ+ Victory Fund and the LGBTQ+ Victory Institute. The organizations, respectively, work to recruit, endorse, and financially support LGBTQ candidates while providing them with leadership development, training, research, and convenings. 

A former elected official who served in the California State Assembly from 2014 to 2024 and was previously the youngest openly gay Asian-American mayor in U.S. history, Low noted that “we have seen a significant increase” in threats and violence targeting LGBTQ candidates. 

While concrete data is limited, Low said the organization has collected anecdotal reports from many of its more than 500 endorsed candidates, detailing everything from homophobic slurs to vandalized signs and direct threats. “Oftentimes, we’ll see lawn signs that say, ‘No homos in our community.’ That happens every single cycle.”

More recently, however, “I’d say, over the past five years, certainly,” Low said, “we’ve seen more of that rhetoric.” From “the conversations that we’ve had with our elected officials,” he said, the upticks are happening in places where “we’ve seen the increase in laws passed in state houses that really target our community, therefore giving justification to see the increase in the type of [anti-LGBTQ] rhetoric that we see.”

To address these risks, Victory Fund offers candidates strategic guidance and peer support. Low emphasized the importance of helping candidates remain authentic while taking the necessary precautions to stay safe. “We provide advice on how to deal with being authentic in your true lived experience as an openly gay person, while also understanding the safety risks that exist.”

To help the principals deal with these challenges, the organization is also piloting mental health and counseling services. “Sadly, this is the state of affairs,” Low said. “But we’re working to support elected officials, particularly in very hostile communities or states.”

One key element is connecting candidates with mentors — sitting officials who have weathered hate, intimidation, and in some cases violence. “We pair candidates up with other elected officials who have gone through these experiences,” Low said. “That way they have someone who can be a sounding board and share how they dealt with it.”

Victory Fund also urges candidates to report any threats. “Campaigning can be lonely and isolating,” Low said. “We want them to know they’re not alone.”

The threats differ depending on the level of office. Local candidates, Low said, because they often focus on basic civic issues like clean water and road maintenance, generally attract less hate and more grace from the communities they serve, while scrutiny is far more intense at the federal level where “you may face opposition research, threats, and high visibility.”

Low explained that Victory Fund’s training programs emphasize practical tactics and safety planning for candidates regardless of which office they are after. Candidates are urged to establish communication with local law enforcement, make their presence known to relevant agencies, and assess the risks unique to their districts. “We ask: Has there been violence in your area? Are there usual suspects that are hostile to our community? What kind of response can you expect from your local law enforcement?”

These conversations often begin even before someone decides to run, which is deliberate. Victory Fund’s four-day training programs are comprehensive, designed to help prospective candidates weigh not just the professional demands of a campaign, but also the toll on their personal lives. “We hope some participants realize this just isn’t for them — that they can support in other ways.”

Low noted that many LGBTQ+ individuals are drawn to service but may be introverted or have caregiving responsibilities that complicate a run for office. Others may be unsure about exposing their families to the risks that come with visibility. The decision of whether to feature photos of same-sex spouses and children in campaign materials, for instance, can be a balance between authentically representing oneself and mitigating legitimate fears about doxxing or harassment. 

He recounted situations in which information about children of LGBTQ candidates was disseminated by far-right actors, even cases where kids were outed online or targeted with slurs. “I want to show that I’m just like any member of the community,” Low said. “But I also want to protect my kids. I’m fair game, but they are not.”

In some cases, Victory Fund has helped candidates erase personal information from the dark web, offering tools and technical assistance to minimize the threat of harassment. Yet, Low was careful to note that political violence can strike anywhere. “Look at Harvey Milk,” Low said. “He was assassinated in a liberal city, in a secured building.”

Low himself required a security detail during his time in the California Legislature. “At Pride parades and public events, I was joined by uniformed officers,” he said. “Even in a progressive state like California, the threats are real.”

That personal experience informs his approach as the head of Victory. “We want to lower the temperature — not just for LGBTQ+ officials but for everyone,” Low said, adding that doing so is vital to preserving democratic norms.

Despite the challenges, Low said interest in running for office has spiked, particularly among transgender individuals. The Victory Institute recently received more than 55 applications for a training cohort specifically for trans candidates, and will launch its first session in Los Angeles this September in partnership with Advocates 4 Trans Equality. Danica Roem, the first openly trans state senator in Virginia and a Victory alum, will be among the trainers.

“You’d think in this hostile environment, people would keep their heads down,” Low said. “Quite the contrary. The uptick is such that members of our community refuse to be erased. They are stepping up.”

He pointed to leaders like U.S. Rep. Sarah McBride, a former Victory intern, and Olivia Hill, the first and only trans person elected in Tennessee, as evidence of what’s possible. “Our mission is to build power for the LGBTQ+ community. We are laser focused on that.”

Many of the group’s most promising candidates are in states where anti-LGBTQ laws are on the books. “They are not just surviving,” Low said. “They are thriving.”

Victory’s long-term strategy is focused not just on the next election but on building a pipeline of LGBTQ leaders for the next 10 to 20 years. “We are about the long game,” Low said. “It’s two steps forward, one step back.”

He hopes the stories of LGBTQ officials running and winning in hostile environments will inspire others to get involved, whether as candidates, donors, appointees, or behind-the-scenes organizers. “We need everyone. And we need them now.”

The goal, Low said, is “To help LGBTQ people seize the highest thrones of power” and “change hearts and minds by showing up and leading.”

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

The White House

HRC files class action over federal ban on gender-affirming care coverage

Lawsuit filed Monday challenges White House effort to restrict care

Published

on

Gender-affirming care activists outside of the D.C. Attorney General's office on Feb. 13, 2026 in support of care for trans youth. (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

The Human Rights Campaign Foundation, the nonprofit sister organization to the largest LGBTQ human rights lobbying and advocacy organization in the U.S., along with law firms Correia & Puth and Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll, filed a class action lawsuit against the government as it attempts to restrict gender-affirming healthcare for federal employees.

The suit, filed on Monday, alleges that the Office of Personnel Management, run by Trump appointee Scott Kupor, is discriminating against LGBTQ federal employees (and their families and retired employees) by prohibiting health insurance coverage for gender-affirming care under the Federal Employees Health Benefits and Postal Service Health Benefits plans. There are five plaintiffs named in the complaint, but it extends to others who have those healthcare plans.

The document asserts that OPM’s prohibition on coverage for “gender transition” care in the FEHB and PSHB programs violates Title VII, the federal law that prohibits discrimination based on sex, race, color, religion, or national origin.

The policy, which was implemented on Jan. 1 following the 2025 issuing of Program Carrier Letter, mandated that insurance providers in these programs deny any coverage for gender-affirming care. In February, HRC filed a federal complaint with OPM over the change in healthcare policy, which was ultimately passed to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission for review. That complaint is now an officially filed class action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.

Research from the Williams Institute at UCLA Law, a think tank that collects data and conducts research on issues related to sexual orientation and gender identity, indicates that this policy denying gender-affirming care will impact healthcare access for at least 39,400 current and former federal employees and their dependents.

Human Rights Campaign President Kelley Robinson released a statement following the lawsuit’s filing.

“Our message to the Trump administration is simple: we’ll see you in court,” said Robinson. “Healthcare access should never be weaponized to advance discrimination — and the denial of coverage for critical healthcare based simply on who you are blatantly violates the rights of all of us.”

Gender-affirming care has been under constant attack by the Trump-Vance administration since its return to the White House, despite the practice being considered as extensively evidence-based but also supported by nearly every major medical organization. This type of care is provided to all people—not just transgender people—and includes things such as social affirmation, including using correct names and pronouns and wearing clothing that matches a person’s gender identity; mental health support, such as counseling to reduce depression and anxiety; and, in some cases, medical interventions such as reversible puberty blockers or hormone therapy when deemed medically appropriate.

“Federal employees have been through the wringer with the Trump administration,” said Cathy Harris, partner at Correia & Puth. “We draw the line at blatant discrimination to deny healthcare to our nation’s dedicated civil servants.”

“This odious policy is the latest example of the Trump administration’s obsession with targeting transgender people, using shameful and cruel tactics to threaten their employment, their health, and the well-being of themselves and their families,” Robinson added. “OPM’s actions will not go unchallenged, and we’ll continue to fight so that federal employees and their families receive the dignity they deserve.”

This is not the first time the White House has directly attacked gender-affirming care.

In January 2025, the administration issued Executive Order 14187, titled “Protecting Children from Chemical and Surgical Mutilation.” The order directs federal agencies to restrict gender-affirming medical care — including puberty blockers, hormone therapy, and surgeries — for individuals under the age of 19.

For more information on how to get involved with the lawsuit, visit hrc.org.

Continue Reading

Politics

Buttigieg indicates he may run for president in 2028 

Former Transportation Secretary was in Biden-Harris administration’s Cabinet

Published

on

Former U.S. Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg speaking at the 2024 Democratic National Convention in Chicago. (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

Former Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg told a podcaster he is considering throwing his hat in the ring for president once again.

“I don’t know,” Buttigieg told Steven Bartlett, the British host of The Diary of a CEO, the most popular top business and tech podcast on Spotify, which aired Monday. “I think I’m more inclined than not, but there’s so much we don’t know.”

“There’s so much I don’t even know about what’s going to happen this year, let alone … what we need to know later,” he added.

Buttigieg is no stranger to running for the Oval Office.

In 2019, the former South Bend, Ind., mayor was a serious contender in the Democratic primary for the 2020 presidential election but ultimately ended his campaign and endorsed Joe Biden.

In May, an Emerson College Polling survey found Buttigieg at the top of the list of potential presidential contenders, leading California Gov. Gavin Newsom, New York Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, former Vice President Kamala Harris, and others.

In addition to discussing his future in federal politics, Buttigieg also discussed President Donald Trump’s handling of the Iran war — which reached its 5-month mark two weeks ago — the changing landscape of U.S. jobs due to the rise of artificial intelligence, and the growing national debt, all issues he could face if he ultimately returns to the White House.

Following his 2020 presidential campaign, Buttigieg gained prominence within the Democratic Party, eventually leading to his confirmation as Transportation Secretary. In February 2021, he became the first openly gay Cabinet member to be confirmed by the U.S. Senate.

In addition to his experience as an elected official, the 44-year-old served as a Navy intelligence officer in the reserves from 2009-2017, including a seven-month deployment to Afghanistan in 2014. Buttigieg came out as gay in 2015 and later married his husband, Chasten Glezman, in 2018. The couple now has two children: twins.

Buttigieg also has an extensive educational background.

He graduated from Harvard University with a bachelor’s degree in history and literature and later became a Rhodes Scholar, attending the University of Oxford, where he earned a bachelor’s degree in philosophy, politics, and economics.

This is not the first time Buttigieg has made headlines this year.

In June, he went public about being falsely accused of posing a threat to his children’s safety. An anonymous police report claimed he was a danger to his 4-year-old twins and was not allowed to be with them until after police interviews were conducted.

The police report was later determined to be false. The Washington Blade reached out to the Michigan State Police to ask what course of action, if any, would be taken against the woman who filed the false report, but the agency did not answer the question.

The Blade reached out to Buttigieg’s team for comment on his potential 2028 presidential bid, but did not hear back before publication. 

Continue Reading

Congress

House blocks effort to codify transgender servicemember ban into law

Lawmakers approved two anti-trans NDAA amendments

Published

on

The Pentagon (Photo by icholakov/Bigstock)

The U.S. House of Representatives on Tuesday rejected an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act that would have codified a ban transgender servicemembers in the military.

The bipartisan vote was 212-217.

The NDAA is for the 2027 fiscal year and sets policies for the Defense Department programs and activities and the national security programs of the Department of Energy.

U.S. Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-Colo.) proposed the amendment on July 21. It stated that all personnel are required to serve in accordance with their biological sex, citing military readiness and discipline.

Human Rights Campaign Senior Director of Government Affairs Jennifer Pike Bailey stated that she is grateful for the bipartisan vote that rejected President Donald Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s “dangerous and discriminatory policy that has kicked brave transgender servicemembers out of the military and weakened our national security.”

“Everyone who meets the same rigorous standards should be able to serve their country. We should honor that patriotism, particularly in this moment where we are witnessing brave servicemembers making the ultimate sacrifice for our country, instead of ending their careers and politicizing their existence. We’re grateful that a permanent extension of this ban failed, and we will keep fighting to reverse this senseless policy,” Bailey said.

Mark Takano, chair of the Congressional Equality Caucus, stated that he and his members put in countless hours of work to kill the amendment.

“When Americans know they or their families are going to be targeted by or not supported by the military, that leads them to avoid signing up to serve or staying in the service — making it harder to keep the ranks of the armed services full and our nation safe. My colleagues in the Equality Caucus and I will continue working to prevent these attacks on our servicemembers and their families from becoming law,” Takano said.

According to the Congressional Equality Caucus, two other bills could potentially be passed that would also target the transgender community, both of which were proposed by U.S. Rep. Nancy Mace (R-S.C.).

The first was a bill that would have prohibited gender-related medical care under TRICARE and to prevent TRICARE from covering certain gender-related medical procedures and treatments, which was approved in a vote of 219-208.

The second was a bill that would have prohibited male participation in female sports at DoDEA schools. DoDEA schools are Department of Defense Dependents Schools, which is a network of primary and secondary schools.

The amendment was approved in a vote of 221-203. 

Continue Reading

Popular