National
Election results put LGBT advocates back on defense
Baldwin says chances ‘slim’ for ENDA in new Congress

In the wake of the seismic change brought about by Election Day results on Tuesday, supporters of LGBT rights are making new plans to advance their agenda in Congress as many signature bills now seem out of reach.
On Tuesday, the Republicans swept back into power by winning a majority of seats in the U.S. House and by shrinking the Democratic majority in the Senate.
CNN on Wednesday projected the GOP will take control of the U.S. House in the 112th Congress by winning at least 60 seats in the election — far more than the 39 seats the party needed to take control of the chamber.
House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio), who was given a score of “0” on the Human Rights Campaign’s most recent congressional scorecard, will likely replace House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) in that role when Republicans come into power in the next Congress.
Democrats fared better in the Senate and retained control of the chamber. Many U.S. senators credited with being allies of the LGBT community, such as Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and Sen. Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), won re-election in tight races.
Still, Democrats in the Senate are left with a reduced majority and some LGBT allies, such as Sen. Russ Feingold (D-Wis.), were ousted by voters.
The major wins by the GOP raises serious doubts about moving big ticket pro-LGBT legislation — such as the Employment Non-Discrimination Act — in the next Congress.
Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), the only out lesbian in Congress, predicted the shift in control of the House will have a “very significant impact” on advancing pro-LGBT legislation.
“What I hope is that the Republican majority that takes over will not revert to its agenda of the last time they were in the majority, which put us frequently on the defense fighting back anti-gay measures,” she said.
Baldwin said the “chances are very slim” that ENDA or legislation providing partner benefits to federal workers would pass.
“I have seen no great signs that the Republicans who have been re-elected have changed their previous stances, and I certainly don’t feel like the new crop of candidates coming in are champions of gay rights,” she said.
Still, LGBT advocates say they see a path forward for advancing certain rights even with the challenge of Republican control of the House and reduced Democratic majorities in the Senate.
Fred Sainz, HRC’s vice president of communications, said the loss of the House will “certainly impede, but not entirely stop” his organization’s pursuit of LGBT rights through legislation.
Among the items that Sainz identified as having a chance for passing are legislation eliminating the tax penalty on employer-provided health benefits to same-sex partners. Sainz also said he sees a way forward for the Domestic Partner Benefits & Obligations Act.
“There could be space to pass something like a domestic partnership taxation bill, or even a [Domestic Partner Benefits & Obligations Act] bill,” Sainz said. “So, in terms of the federal legislative front, I think that that’s probably the best assessment at this point.”
Winnie Stachelberg, senior vice president for external affairs at the Center for American Progress, also said she sees room for the passage of tax equality legislation or a bill to extend partner benefits to federal workers.
“I think if you take a look at some of the issues around equality in benefits, equality in tax treatment — those are issues that I would make investments in and talk about when it comes to Congress,” she said.
Even though Democrats will be in the minority in the House, Sainz said HRC expects lawmakers to introduce major pro-LGBT legislation, such as ENDA and a bill that would repeal the Defense of Marriage Act.
Supporters of LGBT rights are also preparing for the possibility of anti-gay measures. Sainz said he expected “targeted attacks” with anti-LGBT bills and amendments in the Republican-controlled House.
“We will work to stop the legislative rollback at every turn,” Sainz said.
Which anti-gay measures might the House pursue? Sainz said he wouldn’t rule out the possibility of a federal constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage.
“At the highest of levels, we may very well see another Federal Marriage Amendment,” Sainz said. “At probably the more opportunistic level, we may see things inserted into bills as amendments that may be harder to spot.”
Baldwin said LGBT advocates “need to be vigilant” and prepare for any number of anti-gay initiatives that might emerge from the House. Still, Baldwin said she thinks the passage of a Federal Marriage Amendment in the 112th Congress would be “unlikely.”
“I think that is unlikely simply because we still have the super majority requirements in the U.S. Senate, but it may come up, we will have to see,” she said.
Stachelberg said the Republican pledge to repeal the health care reform law should also be seen as an anti-gay initiative. Among other things, the law prohibits insurance companies from discriminating based on HIV status.
“Our community needs to be as vocal as any in beating back those efforts to repeal the health care bill,” Stachelberg said. “It would be devastating to our community.”
The Republican takeover of Congress has also augmented the sense of urgency around finishing legislative work on repealing “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” this year while Democrats control Congress.
Alex Nicholson, executive director of Servicemembers United, said the results on Election Day “underscore the urgent need” to wrap up efforts on repealing the military’s gay ban. A repeal measure is included as part of major defense budget legislation currently pending before the Senate.
“It would be a huge blow, not only to ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ repeal advocates but also to defense contractors and military families, if we don’t get an authorization bill by the end of the year,” Nicholson said.
Nicholson said an “abdication” of the authorization of funds for new defense expenditures and personnel measures would be “unthinkable.”
“This Congress should not want to end its term with that enormous failure on its shoulders,” Nicholson said.
Baldwin also emphasized the importance of the lame duck session in moving forward with “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal — although she characterized the Senate’s chances of passing repeal as only “possible.”
“My hope is that since the lame duck will occur with the hold over incumbents, that they can work their way through a filibuster or avoid a filibuster and resolve to pass legislation that would repeal ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,’” she said.
Many see passage of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” in the lame duck session of Congress before Republicans take control as a challenge. One Democratic aide, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, said a lot has to come into alignment for the Senate to pass such legislation.
“The political climate during the lame duck session will be toxic,” the aide said. “Passage of the defense bill will require all the stars aligning. And it will be impossible to pass this bill without the active support and pressure from President Obama and Defense Secretary Robert Gates.”
With pro-LGBT initiatives possibly tied up for at least the next two years, many advocates are looking more closely at the Obama administration to make changes.
Stachelberg said the LGBT community needs to consider “a range” of ways to address inequality, including non-congressional action.
“Congress is part of that, for sure, but it would be terribly short-sighted if we didn’t invest in efforts to … build on the success that this administration has begun to develop with respect to the executive branch,” she said.
Among the administrative changes that Stachelberg said could be explored are regulatory changes, data collection, non-discrimination policies and funding streams.
Sainz said HRC would continue to push for non-legislative changes from the Obama administration.
“Where federal policy changes are concerned, we believe that non-legislative policy changes will become our continued avenue for progress at the federal level,” Sainz said. “That’s where we’re going to put an awful lot of resources over the next few years.”
According to an HRC document provided by Sainz, among the policy changes the organization is seeking from the administration is LGBT inclusion in health care reform implementation.
Specifically, HRC wants the Department of Health & Human Services to ensure that:
• health disparity and data collection efforts include sexual orientation and gender identity;
• state health insurance exchanges provide coverage available to same-sex partners and their children;
• and benefits packages that insurance plans offer don’t exclude treatments for gender transition.
Another policy change that HRC is seeking is ensuring that LGBT families are included in federal disaster relief.
According to HRC, LGBT families affected by Hurricane Katrina in 2005 were excluded from government services and subjected to anti-gay harassment in shelter facilities. HRC also asserts same-sex couples had difficulty obtaining housing or relief payments.
Consequently, HRC is urging urged the Department of Homeland Security and the Federal Emergency Management Agency to adopt policies barring discrimination against LGBT people and to ensure that their families can receive household aid.
Editor’s note: Tammy Baldwin photo is a Blade file photo by Michael Key
U.S. Supreme Court
Supreme Court to consider bans on trans athletes in school sports
27 states have passed laws limiting participation in athletics programs

The U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday agreed to hear two cases involving transgender youth challenging bans prohibiting them from participating in school sports.
In Little v. Hecox, plaintiffs represented by the ACLU, Legal Voice, and the law firm Cooley are challenging Idaho’s 2020 ban, which requires sex testing to adjudicate questions of an athlete’s eligibility.
The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals described the process in a 2023 decision halting the policy’s enforcement pending an outcome in the litigation. The “sex dispute verification process, whereby any individual can ‘dispute’ the sex of any female student athlete in the state of Idaho,” the court wrote, would “require her to undergo intrusive medical procedures to verify her sex, including gynecological exams.”
In West Virginia v. B.P.J., Lambda Legal, the ACLU, the ACLU of West Virginia, and Cooley are representing a trans middle school student challenging the Mountain State’s 2021 ban on trans athletes.
The plaintiff was participating in cross country when the law was passed, taking puberty blockers that would have significantly reduced the chances that she could have a physiological advantage over cisgender peers.
“Like any other educational program, school athletic programs should be accessible for everyone regardless of their sex or transgender status,” said Joshua Block, senior counsel for the ACLU’s LGBTQ and HIV Project. “Trans kids play sports for the same reasons their peers do — to learn perseverance, dedication, teamwork, and to simply have fun with their friends,” Block said.
He added, “Categorically excluding kids from school sports just because they are transgender will only make our schools less safe and more hurtful places for all youth. We believe the lower courts were right to block these discriminatory laws, and we will continue to defend the freedom of all kids to play.”
“Our client just wants to play sports with her friends and peers,” said Lambda Legal Senior Counsel Tara Borelli. “Everyone understands the value of participating in team athletics, for fitness, leadership, socialization, and myriad other benefits.”
Borelli continued, “The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit last April issued a thoughtful and thorough ruling allowing B.P.J. to continue participating in track events. That well-reasoned decision should stand the test of time, and we stand ready to defend it.”
Shortly after taking control of both legislative chambers, Republican members of Congress tried — unsuccessfully — to pass a national ban like those now enforced in 27 states since 2020.
Federal Government
UPenn erases Lia Thomas’s records as part of settlement with White House
University agreed to ban trans women from women’s sports teams

In a settlement with the Trump-Vance administration announced on Tuesday, the University of Pennsylvania will ban transgender athletes from competing and erase swimming records set by transgender former student Lia Thomas.
The U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights found the university in violation of Title IX, the federal rights law barring sex based discrimination in educational institutions, by “permitting males to compete in women’s intercollegiate athletics and to occupy women-only intimate facilities.”
The statement issued by University of Pennsylvania President J. Larry Jameson highlighted how the law’s interpretation was changed substantially under President Donald Trump’s second term.
“The Department of Education OCR investigated the participation of one transgender athlete on the women’s swimming team three years ago, during the 2021-2022 swim season,” he wrote. “At that time, Penn was in compliance with NCAA eligibility rules and Title IX as then interpreted.”
Jameson continued, “Penn has always followed — and continues to follow — Title IX and the applicable policy of the NCAA regarding transgender athletes. NCAA eligibility rules changed in February 2025 with Executive Orders 14168 and 14201 and Penn will continue to adhere to these new rules.”
Writing that “we acknowledge that some student-athletes were disadvantaged by these rules” in place while Thomas was allowed to compete, the university president added, “We recognize this and will apologize to those who experienced a competitive disadvantage or experienced anxiety because of the policies in effect at the time.”
“Today’s resolution agreement with UPenn is yet another example of the Trump effect in action,” Education Secretary Linda McMahon said in a statement. “Thanks to the leadership of President Trump, UPenn has agreed both to apologize for its past Title IX violations and to ensure that women’s sports are protected at the university for future generations of female athletes.”
Under former President Joe Biden, the department’s Office of Civil Rights sought to protect against anti-LGBTQ discrimination in education, bringing investigations and enforcement actions in cases where school officials might, for example, require trans students to use restrooms and facilities consistent with their birth sex or fail to respond to peer harassment over their gender identity.
Much of the legal reasoning behind the Biden-Harris administration’s positions extended from the 2020 U.S. Supreme Court case Bostock v. Clayton County, which found that sex-based discrimination includes that which is based on sexual orientation or gender identity under Title VII rules covering employment practices.
The Trump-Vance administration last week put the state of California on notice that its trans athlete policies were, or once were, in violation of Title IX, which comes amid the ongoing battle with Maine over the same issue.
New York
Two teens shot steps from Stonewall Inn after NYC Pride parade
One of the victims remains in critical condition

On Sunday night, following the annual NYC Pride March, two girls were shot in Sheridan Square, feet away from the historic Stonewall Inn.
According to an NYPD report, the two girls, aged 16 and 17, were shot around 10:15 p.m. as Pride festivities began to wind down. The 16-year-old was struck in the head and, according to police sources, is said to be in critical condition, while the 17-year-old was said to be in stable condition.
The Washington Blade confirmed with the NYPD the details from the police reports and learned no arrests had been made as of noon Monday.
The shooting took place in the Greenwich Village neighborhood of Manhattan, mere feet away from the most famous gay bar in the city — if not the world — the Stonewall Inn. Earlier that day, hundreds of thousands of people marched down Christopher Street to celebrate 55 years of LGBTQ people standing up for their rights.
In June 1969, after police raided the Stonewall Inn, members of the LGBTQ community pushed back, sparking what became known as the Stonewall riots. Over the course of two days, LGBTQ New Yorkers protested the discriminatory policing of queer spaces across the city and mobilized to speak out — and throw bottles if need be — at officers attempting to suppress their existence.
The following year, LGBTQ people returned to the Stonewall Inn and marched through the same streets where queer New Yorkers had been arrested, marking the first “Gay Pride March” in history and declaring that LGBTQ people were not going anywhere.
New York State Assemblywoman Deborah Glick, whose district includes Greenwich Village, took to social media to comment on the shooting.
“After decades of peaceful Pride celebrations — this year gun fire and two people shot near the Stonewall Inn is a reminder that gun violence is everywhere,” the lesbian lawmaker said on X. “Guns are a problem despite the NRA BS.”
-
U.S. Supreme Court2 days ago
Supreme Court to consider bans on trans athletes in school sports
-
Out & About2 days ago
Celebrate the Fourth of July the gay way!
-
Virginia2 days ago
Va. court allows conversion therapy despite law banning it
-
Federal Government4 days ago
UPenn erases Lia Thomas’s records as part of settlement with White House