Federal Government
LGBTQ federal workers face growing strain, fear of backsliding rights
Government shutdown began on Oct. 1
The federal government has been shut down since Oct. 1, marking the second-longest shutdown in American history. This is the third government shutdown under a Trump presidency.
Government shutdowns have become a somewhat normalized part of American governance. Their circumstances often vary, but the solution is always the same: Congress must appropriate the funding for the federal government.
At the heart of the current shutdown is a disagreement over healthcare: Democrats want to extend Medicaid and Affordable Care Act subsidies granted during COVID-19, while Republicans, with the Trump-Vance administration at the helm, argue these subsidies should expire to save money. The standoff has left millions at risk of losing coverage because they otherwise won’t be able to afford it.
As Congress fails to reach a decision on healthcare, roughly 4.5 million paychecks will be withheld from federal civilian employees. Additionally, 1.3 million active-duty personnel and over 750,000 National Guard and Reserve members are required to serve, potentially without pay, according to an Oct. 24 study by the Bipartisan Policy Center.
The Washington Blade spoke with two LGBTQ federal employees from different parts of the government to understand how the shutdown has disrupted their lives and added stress to an already uncertain future.
Both sources spoke on the condition of anonymity, citing fear of retribution amid the current political climate surrounding federal employment and their sexuality. For LGBTQ federal employees, the stakes are often higher, as they must navigate not only financial and professional uncertainty but also a political environment that can threaten hard-won rights and recognition.
The first federal employee with whom the Blade spoke described the difficulty of focusing on work amid the chaos.
“I feel like I expected a certain amount of crazy with the shutdown, but I wasn’t quite ready for, as Steve Bannon said, ‘the muzzle velocity of all this’ — just how quickly they would implement things across the board,” they said. “That’s made it really hard to focus on any one issue, and I think even trans issues almost get buried under all the other things happening.”
They noted that the current shutdown differs from previous ones, in part because of the sheer number of concurrent crises and the quiet targeting of LGBTQ-related programs.
“Even the last shutdown felt huge, it galvanized the news, but this time there are so many other critical things happening at the same time — ICE kidnapping people, the Epstein files, changes in the LGBT space,” they said. “A lot of it happens quietly, under the radar, and it’s troubling.”
The employee also raised concerns about the slow erosion of government services and oversight, particularly in ways that affect LGBTQ representation and history.
“It’s scary how quickly some government agencies can be stripped of their oversight and history. Like the National Park Service scrubbing things off the Stonewall historic marker, or LGBT references from museum exhibits in the Smithsonian, or kicking drag queens and Pride events from the Kennedy Center,” they said. “I feel like there are so many things that would have been huge stories, but just because of how fast everything has happened, it’s allowed a lot of stuff to happen quietly under the radar that’s pretty troubling.”
Despite these challenges, they emphasized the dedication of federal workers, many of whom choose public service over higher-paying private-sector jobs.
“One of the coolest things about D.C. is meeting people who were top of their class, who could have gone into business for themselves, but instead chose to give back and do work that has an impact on the country,” they said. “There are so many people quietly doing fascinating, important work, and they want to keep doing that.”
The employee expressed frustration over the broken budget system, which adds to the instability of federal employment.
“The budgeting system is broken. No other country operates the way we do, and it creates constant uncertainty for federal workers,” they said. “If budgets continued automatically unless changed, we could plan multi-year projects and make government work more effectively.”
Despite the challenges, they stressed that federal workers’ contributions benefit real people, often in ways that go unnoticed.
“Most federal workers do not want to be the story. We want the story to be about real people whose lives are better because of our work. Even during a shutdown, the focus should not be on us, but on the services we provide and the impact we make,” they said.
The Blade also spoke with a second federal employee, who works with the military. They highlighted the personal and financial pressures that accompany a furlough.
“I’ve always worked with the military, and I don’t have a sense of purpose being here without my job … I also need my paycheck, obviously,” they said.
They described the toll the shutdown is taking on mental health — specifically the anxiety over housing costs and the uncertainty of back pay.
“I bought a house, and now I have a mortgage to pay, and I can’t pay it. This is my source of income. I got three months of forbearance on my mortgage, which is a huge relief, because that’s probably my biggest bill,” they said.
Being part of the LGBTQ community has offered some support — particularly from smaller groups and businesses providing free or reduced-cost meals, events, and drinks to federal employees. Many LGBTQ bars and restaurants have begun offering free drink hours in response to the shutdown, including Crush, Shaw’s Tavern, and Shakers. These discounts provide a few moments of relief, the first federal employee explained, but they don’t fully shield workers from the pressures of a shutdown.
“As an out gay federal employee, there’s a broad network of support within the LGBTQ community … I have access to those networks, and I might be better off than my straight counterparts because of that,” they said.
The second federal employee also voiced concern about political bargaining over federal pay and protections.
“It’s troubling to see lawyers in the administration argue that we may not be entitled to back pay, when we are guaranteed this by law,” they said. “I would like to see them not use our pay and our livelihoods as a bargaining chip for their political agenda.”
Reflecting on the broader implications, the employee tied the shutdown to historical challenges for LGBTQ people in federal service.
“I joined the military after ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,’ and now serve as a civilian in the same military … I’ve seen LGBT rights advance a lot in my lifetime,” they said. “I would hate to see that backslide and feel like I have to be concerned in my position … because of my sexuality.”
Another factor complicating the shutdown is the optics — both the visuals and rhetoric coming from the White House.
The Trump-Vance administration continues to push the narrative that Democrats alone are to blame, rather than acknowledging the broader lack of bipartisan cooperation. Coupled with the White House’s visible efforts to renovate and upgrade the presidential living quarters, it all carries a certain “let them eat cake” undertone.
“It’s heartbreaking to see the East Wing being demolished so quickly without process or public input, while other government workers are furloughed,” the second federal employee with whom the Blade spoke said. “It makes the White House feel like a commodity for sale, and it’s demoralizing for those who maintain it.”
“Seeing bulldozers funded by corporations plow through the White House grounds while National Park Service employees are furloughed is demoralizing,” they added. “It’s a very visual metaphor for what’s happening across the government: those entrusted to maintain it are out of work, while other interests move forward unchecked.”
They continued, explaining that unity — not division — is needed to do the type of work millions of federal employees perform every day.
“I can’t always tell who among my colleagues is conservative or liberal, and honestly, most people just want the government to work efficiently. Even conservatives, when they see potential improvements, want the government to deliver,” they said. “It’s the follow-through that really matters — the thousands of people slogging away doing the actual work.”
Federal Government
Top Democrats reintroduce bill to investigate discrimination against LGBTQ military members
Takano, Jacobs, and Blumenthal sponsored measure
Multiple high-ranking members of Congress reintroduced the Commission on Equity and Reconciliation in the Uniformed Services Act into the U.S. House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate, aiming to establish a commission to investigate discriminatory policies targeting LGBTQ military members.
Three leading Democratic members of Congress — U.S. Rep. Mark Takano (D-Calif.), who is the House Veterans’ Affairs Committee’s ranking member and chairs the Congressional Equality Caucus; U.S. Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), who is the Senate Veterans’ Affairs Committee’s ranking member; and U.S. Rep. Sara Jacobs (D-Calif.) — introduced the bill on Tuesday.
The bill, they say, would establish a commission to investigate the historic and ongoing impacts of discriminatory military policies on LGBTQ servicemembers and veterans.
This comes on the one-year anniversary of the Trump-Vance administration’s 2025 Executive Order 14183, titled “Prioritizing Military Excellence and Readiness,” which essentially banned transgender servicemembers from openly serving in the Armed Forces, leading to the forced separation of thousands of capable and dedicated servicemembers.
In a joint statement, Takano, Blumenthal, and Jacobs shared statistics on how many service members have had their ability to serve revoked due to their sexual orientation:
“Approximately 114,000 servicemembers were discharged on the basis of their sexual orientation between WWII and 2011, while an estimated 870,000 LGBTQ servicemembers have been impacted by hostility, harassment, assault, and law enforcement targeting due to the military policies in place,” the press release reads. “These separations are devastating and have long-reaching impacts. Veterans who were discharged on discriminatory grounds are unable to access their benefits, and under the Trump administration, LGBTQ+ veterans and servicemembers have been openly persecuted.”
The proposed commission is modeled after the Congressional commission that investigated and secured redress for Japanese Americans interned during World War II. Takano’s family was among the more than 82,000 Japanese Americans who received an official apology and redress payment under that commission.
The press release notes this is a major inspiration for the act.
“Qualified servicemembers were hunted down and forced to leave the military at the direction of our government,” said Takano. “These practices have continued, now with our government targeting transgender servicemembers. The forced separation and dishonorable discharges LGBTQ+ people received must be rectified, benefits fully granted, and dignity restored to those who have protected our freedoms.”
“LGBTQ+ servicemembers have long been the target of dangerous and discriminatory policies—resulting in harassment, involuntary discharge, and barriers to their earned benefits,” said Blumenthal. “Establishing this commission is an important step to understand the full scope of harm and address the damage caused by policies like ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.’ As LGBTQ+ servicemembers and veterans face repugnant and blatant bigotry under the Trump administration, we will keep fighting to secure a more equitable future for all who serve our country in uniform.”
“Instead of righting wrongs and making amends to our LGBTQ+ service members and veterans who’ve suffered injustices for decades, I’m ashamed that the Trump administration has doubled down: kicking trans folks out of the military and banning their enlistment,” said Jacobs. “We know that LGBTQ+ service members and veterans have faced so much ugliness — discrimination, harassment, professional setbacks, and even violence — that has led to unjust discharges and disparities in benefits, but we still don’t have a full picture of all the harm caused. That needs to change. That’s why I’m proud to co-lead this bill to investigate these harms, address the impacts of discriminatory official policies like ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ and the transgender military ban, and ensure equity and justice for our LGBTQ+ service members and veterans.”
Takano and Jacobs are leading the bill in the House, while Blumenthal is introducing companion legislation in the Senate.
Takano’s office has profiled and interviewed LGBTQ servicemembers who were harmed by discriminatory policies in the uniformed services.
The Commission on Equity and Reconciliation in the Uniformed Services Act is supported by Minority Veterans of America, Human Rights Campaign, Equality California, SPARTA, and the Transgender American Veterans Association.
In recent weeks, thousands of trans military members were forcibly put into retirement as a result of Trump’s executive order, including five honored by the Human Rights Campaign with a combined 100 years of service, all due to their gender identity: Col. Bree B. Fram (U.S. Space Force), Commander Blake Dremann (U.S. Navy), Lt. Col. (Ret.) Erin Krizek (U.S. Air Force), Chief Petty Officer (Ret.) Jaida McGuire (U.S. Coast Guard), and Sgt. First Class (Ret.) Catherine Schmid (U.S. Army).
Multiple career service members spoke at the ceremony, including Takano. Among the speakers was Frank Kendall III, the 26th U.S. Air Force secretary, who said:
“We are in a moment of crisis that will be worse before it is better. Members of my father’s and mother’s generation would ask each other a question: what did you do during the war? Someday we will all be asked what we did during this time. Please think about the answer that you will give.”
Federal Government
Trump-appointed EEOC leadership rescinds LGBTQ worker guidance
The EEOC voted to rescind its 2024 guidance, minimizing formally expanded protections for LGBTQ workers.
The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission voted 2–1 to repeal its 2024 guidance, rolling back formally expanded protections for LGBTQ workers.
The EEOC, which is composed of five commissioners, is tasked with enforcing federal laws that make workplace discrimination illegal. Since President Donald Trump appointed two Republican commissioners last year — Andrea R. Lucas as chair in January and Brittany Panuccio in October — the commission’s majority has increasingly aligned its work with conservative priorities.
The commission updated its guidance in 2024 under then-President Joe Biden to expand protections to LGBTQ workers, particularly transgender workers — the most significant change to the agency’s harassment guidance in 25 years.
The directive, which spanned nearly 200 pages, outlined how employers may not discriminate against workers based on protected characteristics, including race, sex, religion, age, and disability as defined under federal law.
One issue of particular focus for Republicans was the guidance’s new section on gender identity and sexual orientation. Citing the 2020 U.S. Supreme Court’s Bostock v. Clayton County decision and other cases, the guidance included examples of prohibited conduct, such as the repeated and intentional use of a name or pronoun an individual no longer uses, and the denial of access to bathrooms consistent with a person’s gender identity.
Last year a federal judge in Texas had blocked that portion of the guidance, saying that finding was novel and was beyond the scope of the EEOC’s powers in issuing guidance.
The dissenting vote came from the commission’s sole Democratic member, Commissioner Kalpana Kotagal.
“There’s no reason to rescind the harassment guidance in its entirety,” Kotagal said Thursday. “Instead of adopting a thoughtful and surgical approach to excise the sections the majority disagrees with or suggest an alternative, the commission is throwing out the baby with the bathwater. Worse, it is doing so without public input.”
While this now rescinded EEOC guidance is not legally binding, it is widely considered a blueprint for how the commission will enforce anti-discrimination laws and is often cited by judges deciding novel legal issues.
Multiple members of Congress released a joint statement condemning the agency’s decision to minimize worker protections, including U.S. Reps. Teresa Leger Fernández (D-N.M.), Grace Meng (D-N.Y.), Mark Takano (D-Calif.), Adriano Espaillat (D-N.Y.), and Yvette Clarke (D-N.Y.) The rescission follows the EEOC’s failure to respond to or engage with a November letter from Democratic Caucus leaders urging the agency to retain the guidance and protect women and vulnerable workers.
“The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission is supposed to protect vulnerable workers, including women, people of color, and LGBTQI+ workers, from discrimination on the job. Yet, since the start of her tenure, the EEOC chair has consistently undermined protections for women, people of color, and LGBTQI+ workers. Now, she is taking away guidance intended to protect workers from harassment on the job, including instructions on anti-harassment policies, training, and complaint processes — and doing so outside of the established rule-making process. When workers are sexually harassed, called racist slurs, or discriminated against at work, it harms our workforce and ultimately our economy. Workers can’t afford this — especially at a time of high costs, chaotic tariffs, and economic uncertainty. Women and vulnerable workers deserve so much better.”
Federal Government
Holiday week brings setbacks for Trump-Vance trans agenda
Federal courts begin to deliver end-of-year responses to lawsuits involving federal transgender healthcare policy.
While many Americans took the week of Christmas to rest and relax, LGBTQ politics in the U.S. continued to shift. This week’s short recap of federal updates highlights two major blows to the Trump-Vance administration’s efforts to restrict gender-affirming care for minors.
19 states sue RFK Jr. to end gender-affirming care ban
New York Attorney General Letitia James announced on Tuesday that the NYAG’s office, along with 18 other states (and the District of Columbia), filed a lawsuit to stop U.S. Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. from restricting gender-affirming care for minors.
In the press release, Attorney General James stressed that the push by the Trump-Vance administration’s crusade against the transgender community — specifically transgender youth — is a “clear overreach by the federal government” and relies on conservative and medically unvalidated practices to “punish providers who adhere to well-established, evidence-based care” that support gender-affirming care.
“At the core of this so-called declaration are real people: young people who need care, parents trying to support their children, and doctors who are simply following the best medical evidence available,” said Attorney General James. “Secretary Kennedy cannot unilaterally change medical standards by posting a document online, and no one should lose access to medically necessary health care because their federal government tried to interfere in decisions that belong in doctors’ offices. My office will always stand up for New Yorkers’ health, dignity, and right to make medical decisions free from intimidation.”
The lawsuit is a direct response to HHS’ Dec. 18 announcement that it will pursue regulatory changes that would make gender-affirming health care for transgender children more difficult, if not impossible, to access. It would also restrict federal funding for any hospital that does not comply with the directive. KFF, an independent source for health policy research, polling, and journalism, found that in 2023 federal funding covered nearly 45% of total spending on hospital care in the U.S.
The HHS directive stems directly from President Donald Trump’s Jan. 28 Executive Order, Protecting Children From Chemical and Surgical Mutilation, which formally establishes U.S. opposition to gender-affirming care and pledges to end federal funding for such treatments.
The American Medical Association, the nation’s largest and most influential physician organization, has repeatedly opposed measures like the one pushed by President Trump’s administration that restrict access to trans health care.
“The AMA supports public and private health insurance coverage for treatment of gender dysphoria and opposes the denial of health insurance based on sexual orientation or gender identity,” a statement on the AMA’s website reads. “Improving access to gender-affirming care is an important means of improving health outcomes for the transgender population.”
The lawsuit also names Oregon, Washington, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, New Mexico, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Wisconsin as having joined New York in the push against restricting gender-affirming care.
At the HHS news conference last Thursday, Jim O’Neill, deputy secretary of the department, asserted, “Men are men. Men can never become women. Women are women. Women can never become men.”
DOJ stopped from gaining health care records of trans youth
U.S. District Judge Cathy Bissoon blocked an attempt by the Department of Justice (DOJ) to gain “personally identifiable information about those minor transgender patients” from the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center (UPMC), saying the DOJ’s efforts “fly in the face of the Supreme Court.”
Journalist Chris Geidner originally reported the news on Dec. 25, highlighting that the Western District of Pennsylvania judge’s decision is a major blow to the Trump-Vance administration’s agenda to curtail transgender rights.
“[T]his Court joins the others in finding that the government’s demand for deeply private and personal patient information carries more than a whiff of ill intent,” Bissoon wrote in her ruling. “This is apparent from its rhetoric.”
Bissoon cited the DOJ’s “incendiary characterization” of trans youth care on the DOJ website as proof, which calls the practice politically motivated rather than medically sound and seeks to “…mutilate children in the service of a warped ideology.” This is despite the fact that a majority of gender-affirming care has nothing to do with surgery.
In United States v. Skrmetti, the Supreme Court ruled along party lines that states — namely Tennessee — have the right to pass legislation that can prohibit certain medical treatments for transgender minors, saying the law is not subject to heightened scrutiny under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment because it does not involve suspect categories like race, national origin, alienage, and religion, which would require the government to show the law serves a compelling interest and is narrowly tailored, sending decision-making power back to the states.
“The government cannot pick and choose the aspects of Skrmetti to honor, and which to ignore,” Judge Bissoon added.
The government argued unsuccessfully that the parents of the children whose records would have been made available to the DOJ “lacked standing” because the subpoena was directed at UPMC and that they did not respond in a timely manner. Bissoon rejected the timeliness argument in particular as “disingenuous.”
Bissoon, who was nominated to the bench by then-President Obama, is at least the fourth judge to reject the DOJ’s attempted intrusion into the health care of trans youth according to Geidner.
