National
Polis backs executive order barring anti-LGBT job bias
Gay lawmaker skeptical about ENDA’s prospects

Rep. Jared Polis (D-Colo.) announced support on Monday for an executive order that would protect LGBT people against bias in the workforce by prohibiting the federal government from contracting with companies that don’t have non-discrimination policies based on sexual orientation and gender identity.
“I would applaud that step,” Polis said. “I think that would show a lot of courage on behalf of the administration and demonstrate that they’re committed to moving to a discrimination-free workplace environment.”
The executive order endorsed by Polis during a Washington Blade interview has been seen as an interim alternative to passage of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act — legislation that would would bar job discrimination against LGBT people in most situations in the private and public workforce — while Republicans are in control of the House and progress on the measure is unlikely.
Polis’ announcement comes as House introduction of ENDA was expected this week. Harry Gural, a spokesperson for gay Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.), said his boss would announce when the legislation would be introduced on Wednesday, although the exact day for the debut of the bill isn’t yet final.
Polis has a dim view of the chances of passing ENDA — as well as other pro-LGBT legislation — for at least the next two years with House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) in charge of the chamber.
“ENDA had several Republican co-sponsors, but I don’t think it’s likely the Republicans will advance employment non-discrimination,” Polis said
In the meantime, Polis said supporters in Congress should try to educate the public on the issue of job protection and grow the number of co-sponsors for ENDA.
“Nationally, we just need to continue to educate other members of Congress and their staff on what it means,” Polis said.
As he dismissed the prospects of passing pro-LGBT bills during the 112th Congress, Polis said the LGBT community will instead for this period have to focus on beating back anti-gay measures.
“I think we’ll be playing defense,” Polis said. “Certainly there are members of the Republican caucus that want to go after and attack some of the progress that’s been made [in the few] last years. I wouldn’t be surprised if we have to work hard to maintain that progress.”
Among the anti-gay measures that Polis said could emerge during the 112th Congress is revocation of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal and repeal of hate crimes protections legislation — both measures that were passed during the 111th Congress when Democrats had control of both the House and the Senate.
“Those are the two main pieces of progress that we made in the last [Congress], both of which nearly all the Republicans opposed,” Polis said.
Still, Polis expressed optimism about the Student Non-Discrimination Act — a measure he introduced earlier in March in the House along with Sen. Al Franken (D-Minn.) in the Senate.
The legislation, which as of Monday had 103 co-sponsors in the House, would prohibit discrimination, including harassment, against LGBT students in public schools throughout the country.
Polis predicted the number of co-sponsors for the legislation would continue to grow and would see increased support from both Democrats and Republicans.
“I think it’s one thing that conservatives and liberals can agree on — people should feel safe in school,” he said.
Polis noted that supporters of the legislation have been pushing for its inclusion — along with the Safe Schools Improvement Act, a measure requiring schools to set up anti-bullying policies — as part of education reform legislation, or Elementary & Secondary Education Act reauthorization, which President Obama has been calling on Congress to pass this year.
“It’s tied into the fate of ESEA reauthorization, and so if this Congress moves forward with reauthorization of the federal education law, I’m optimistic that we’ll be able to implement protections against bullying in the bill,” Polis said.
Still, Polis said he couldn’t at this point estimate the chances for the success of passing education reform — with or without anti-bullying or anti-discrimination language.
Polis said while the Democratic-controlled Senate intends to pursue broader education reform legislation, Republican leadership in the House is only “looking at a couple of changes rather than a full-out reauthorization.”
“It’s too early to tell whether the 112th [Congress] will issue major changes in federal education policy,” Polis said.
President Obama has yet to enumerate support for the Student Non-Discrimination Act, even though the Obama administration has taken steps to address bullying in schools, such as holding a summit on the issue in March. Polis said he hopes to work with the White House to obtain an endorsement for his bill.
“We’re working closely with the administration to fine tune these bills and help the administration deliver on its promise to reduce and end bullying,” Polis said.
Another larger vehicle that advocates are hoping to use to pass a pro-LGBT measure during the 112th Congress is comprehensive immigration reform.
As talks have reportedly begun again on Capitol Hill related to immigration, LGBT rights supporters are seeking to ensure this larger legislation would incorporate language that would allow gay Americans to sponsor foreign partners for residency within the United States. In the 111th Congress, standalone legislation that would have had this effect was known as the Uniting American Families Act.
But Polis dismissed the possibility of passing comprehensive immigration reform for the next two years — with or without UAFA-like language — given the current makeup of Congress.
“I don’t see much hope for comprehensive immigration reform given the fact that most of the members of the current majority ran against it, so it’s unlikely this Congress,” Polis said.
Still, Polis said he welcomed the decision from U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services to hold in abeyance the deportation of foreign nationals who are seeking green cards through a same-sex American spouse, although he noted the limitation of this move.
“It’s certainly a step in the right direction, but keep in mind that those individuals would still be unable to work in this country and be unable to access various services legally, so it’s not really a solution,” Polis said.
Polis said he was unsure about prospects for another piece of expected legislation that would eliminate the federal tax on employer-provided health coverage for same-sex couples. In the previous Congress, the legislation was known as the Tax Equity for Health Plan Beneficiaries Act.
With the GOP in control of the House, Log Cabin Republicans has said it would push for the legislation and has maintained it has a shot at passage because it relates to lowering taxes, an effort that Republicans traditionally favor.
Polis said he supports the legislation, but deferred to Republican leadership on the chances of the bill passing over the course of the next two years.
“I think it’s unfair that same-sex couples have disparate treatment, but you’d have to ask the question to the Republican majority to see if they support it,” Polis said.
On “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal, Polis said he’s awaiting certification for ending the law as the Pentagon implements training for open service in the U.S. military.
The repeal law that President Obama signed in December allows for repeal only after 60 days pass when the president, the defense secretary and the chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff certify that the U.S. military is ready for open service. Servicemembers Legal Defense Network has called for expedited training to implement repeal more quickly in the armed forces.
Asked whether he thinks the training is proceeding at a satisfactory pace, Polis replied, “The proof will be in the pudding and we all look forward to the certification of the process — hopefully in the weeks or the very few months ahead when the policy formally is repealed.”
LGBT advocates have been calling on President Obama to issue an executive order that would provide explicit protections for gay service members who feel they’ve experienced discrimination in the armed forces. The White House hasn’t explicitly endorsed or rejected the idea, but has noted policy guidance stating that harassment or abuse based on sexual orientation would be unacceptable in the military.
Despite this call, Polis stopped short of endorsing such an executive order for the U.S. military.
“The military is not my area of expertise,” Polis said. “I’ve been on the board of the Air Force Academy for two years. I’m learning a lot more about defense issues, but I don’t really have an opinion on that yet.”
While expressing skepticism about the chances for federal progress on LGBT issues in this Congress, Polis was optimistic about the prospects for a pro-LGBT bill in his home state of Colorado: a measure that would legalize civil unions.
“It passed the Senate and has the governor’s support, so hopefully it’ll pass the House,” Polis said.
Polis said lawmakers are pursuing civil unions instead of same-sex marriage legislation because no lawmaker introduced a measure to expand marriage in the state to include gay couples.
Obama hasn’t come out in favor of same-sex marriage, although in December he said he’s been “wrestling” with the issue. Many LGBT advocates have been calling on the president to continue his evolution and back marriage equality.
Asked whether support for same-sex marriage from the president would open the door for gay nuptials in Colorado, Polis replied, “I think the president’s journey is similar to the journey of many people here in Colorado. Many people aren’t quite sure what to think on this issue. They’ve come a long way from where they are or were a decade or two ago, and, of course, the younger generation is already there.”
“Just as the president is wrestling with this issue, many mainstream Americans are wrestling with this issue,” Polis added
Evaluating Obama’s work on LGBT issues as a whole, Polis said the president is “doing a great job” and emphasized Obama can’t enact legislation that members of the LGBT community have been pushing for on his own accord.
“Keep in mind that the president can’t initiate legislation,” Polis said. “It has to pass the House and the Senate. But with regard to his executive orders and his legal strategy — not defending [the Defense of Marriage Act] — I applaud his efforts. I think this administration has been working closely with the LGBT community on the issue of equality.”
State Department
Rubio mum on Hungary’s Pride ban
Lawmakers on April 30 urged secretary of state to condemn anti-LGBTQ bill, constitutional amendment

More than 20 members of Congress have urged Secretary of State Marco Rubio to publicly condemn a Hungarian law that bans Pride events.
California Congressman Mark Takano, a Democrat who co-chairs the Congressional Equality Caucus, and U.S. Rep. Bill Keating (D-Mass.), who is the ranking member on the House Foreign Affairs Committee’s Europe Subcommittee, spearheaded the letter that lawmakers sent to Rubio on April 30.
Hungarian lawmakers in March passed a bill that bans Pride events and allow authorities to use facial recognition technology to identify those who participate in them. MPs last month amended the Hungarian constitution to ban public LGBTQ events.
“As a NATO ally which hosts U.S. service members, we expect the Hungarian government to abide by certain values which underpin the historic U.S.-Hungary bilateral relationship,” reads the letter. “Unfortunately, this new legislation and constitutional amendment disproportionately and arbitrarily target sexual and gender minorities.”
Prime Minister Viktor Orbán’s government over the last decade has moved to curtail LGBTQ and intersex rights in Hungary.
A law that bans legal recognition of transgender and intersex people took effect in 2020. Hungarian MPs that year also effectively banned same-sex couples from adopting children and defined marriage in the constitution as between a man and a woman.
An anti-LGBTQ propaganda law took effect in 2021. The European Commission sued Hungary, which is a member of the European Union, over it.
MPs in 2023 approved the “snitch on your gay neighbor” bill that would have allowed Hungarians to anonymously report same-sex couples who are raising children. The Budapest Metropolitan Government Office in 2023 fined Lira Konyv, the country’s second-largest bookstore chain, 12 million forints ($33,733.67), for selling copies of British author Alice Oseman’s “Heartstopper.”
Former U.S. Ambassador to Hungary David Pressman, who is gay, participated in the Budapest Pride march in 2024 and 2023. Pressman was also a vocal critic of Hungary’s anti-LGBTQ crackdown.
“Along with years of democratic backsliding in Hungary, it flies in the face of those values and the passage of this legislation deserves quick and decisive criticism and action in response by the Department of State,” reads the letter, referring to the Pride ban and constitutional amendment against public LGBTQ events. “Therefore, we strongly urge you to publicly condemn this legislation and constitutional change which targets the LGBTQ community and undermines the rights of Hungarians to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly.”
U.S. Reps. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), Sarah McBride (D-Del.), Jim Costa (D-Calif.), James McGovern (D-Mass.), Gerry Connolly (D-Va.), Summer Lee (D-Pa.), Joaquin Castro (D-Texas), Julie Johnson (D-Texas), Ami Bera (D-Calif.), Mark Pocan (D-Wis.), Lloyd Doggett (D-Texas), Becca Balint (D-Vt.), Gabe Amo (D-R.I.), Ted Lieu (D-Calif.), Robert Garcia (D-Calif.), Dina Titus (D-Nev.), Raja Krishnamoorthi (D-Ill.), Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.) and Mike Quigley (D-Ill.) and Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-D.C.) signed the letter alongside Takano and Keating.
A State Department spokesperson on Wednesday declined to comment.
Federal Government
HRC memo details threats to LGBTQ community in Trump budget
‘It’s a direct attack on LGBTQ+ lives’

A memo issued Monday by the Human Rights Campaign details threats to LGBTQ people from the “skinny” budget proposal issued by President Donald Trump on May 2.
HRC estimates the total cost of “funding cuts, program eliminations, and policy changes” impacting the community will exceed approximately $2.6 billion.
Matthew Rose, the organization’s senior public policy advocate, said in a statement that “This budget is more than cuts on a page—it’s a direct attack on LGBTQ+ lives.”
“Trump is taking away life-saving healthcare, support for LGBTQ-owned businesses, protections against hate crimes, and even housing help for people living with HIV,” he said. “Stripping away more than $2 billion in support sends one clear message: we don’t matter. But we’ve fought back before, and we’ll do it again—we’re not going anywhere.”
Proposed rollbacks or changes at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services will target the Ryan White HIV/AIDS Program, other programs related to STI prevention, viral hepatitis, and HIV, initiatives housed under the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, and research by the National Institutes of Health and Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.
Other agencies whose work on behalf of LGBTQ populations would be jeopardized or eliminated under Trump’s budget include the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, the U.S. Department of Justice, the U.S. Small Business Administration, and the U.S. Department of Education.
U.S. Supreme Court
Supreme Court allows Trump admin to enforce trans military ban
Litigation challenging the policy continues in the 9th Circuit

The U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday allowed the Trump-Vance administration to enforce a ban on transgender personnel serving in the U.S. Armed Forces pending the outcome of litigation challenging the policy.
The brief order staying a March 27 preliminary injunction issued by the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington notes the dissents from liberal Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson.
On the first day of his second term, President Donald Trump issued an executive order requiring Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth to effectuate a ban against transgender individuals, going further than efforts under his first administration — which did not target those currently serving.
The DoD’s Feb. 26 ban argued that “the medical, surgical, and mental health constraints on individuals who have a current diagnosis or history of, or exhibit symptoms with, gender dysphoria are incompatible with the high mental and physical standards necessary for military service.”
The case challenging the Pentagon’s policy is currently on appeal before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. The lead plaintiff is U.S. Navy Commander Emily Shilling, who is joined in the litigation by other current transgender members of the armed forces, one transgender person who would like to join, and a nonprofit whose members either are transgender troops or would like to be.
Lambda Legal and the Human Rights Campaign Foundation, both representing the plaintiffs, issued a statement Tuesday in response to the Supreme Court’s decision:
“Today’s Supreme Court ruling is a devastating blow to transgender servicemembers who have demonstrated their capabilities and commitment to our nation’s defense.
“By allowing this discriminatory ban to take effect while our challenge continues, the Court has temporarily sanctioned a policy that has nothing to do with military readiness and everything to do with prejudice.
“Transgender individuals meet the same standards and demonstrate the same values as all who serve. We remain steadfast in our belief that this ban violates constitutional guarantees of equal protection and will ultimately be struck down.”
U.S. Solicitor General D. John Sauer noted that courts must show “substantial deference” to DoD decision making on military issues.
“The Supreme Court’s decision to allow the military ban to go into effect is devastating for the thousands of qualified transgender servicemembers who have met the standards and are serving honorably, putting their lives on the line for their country every single day,” said GLAD Law Senior Director of Transgender and Queer Rights Jennifer Levi. “Today’s decision only adds to the chaos and destruction caused by this administration. It’s not the end of the case, but the havoc it will wreak is devastating and irreparable. History will confirm the weight of the injustice done today.”
“The Court has upended the lives of thousands of servicemembers without even the decency of explaining why,” said NCLR Legal Director Shannon Minter. “As a result of this decision, reached without benefit of full briefing or argument, brave troops who have dedicated their lives to the service of our country will be targeted and forced into harsh administrative separation process usually reserved for misconduct. They have proven themselves time and time again and met the same standards as every other soldier, deploying in critical positions around the globe. This is a deeply sad day for our country.”
Levi and Minter are the lead attorneys in the first two transgender military ban cases to be heard in federal court, Talbott v. Trump and Ireland v. Hegseth.
U.S. Rep. Mark Takano (D-Calif.) issued a statement on behalf of the Congressional Equality Caucus, where he serves as chair.
“By lifting the lower court’s preliminary injunction and allowing Trump to enforce his trans troop ban as litigation continues, the Supreme Court is causing real harm to brave Americans who simply want to serve their nation in uniform.
“The difference between Donald Trump, a draft dodger, and the countless brave Americans serving their country who just happen to be trans couldn’t be starker. Let me be clear: Trump’s ban isn’t going to make our country safer—it will needlessly create gaps in critical chains of military command and actively undermine our national security.
“The Supreme Court was absolutely wrong to allow this ban to take effect. I hope that lower courts move swiftly so this ban can ultimately be struck down.”
SPARTA Pride also issued a statement:
“The Roberts Court’s decision staying the preliminary injunction will allow the Trump purge of transgender service members from the military to proceed.
“Transgender Americans have served openly, honorably, and effectively in the U.S. Armed Forces for nearly a decade. Thousands of transgender troops are currently serving, and are fully qualified for the positions in which they serve.
“Every court up to now has found that this order is unconstitutional. Nevertheless, the Roberts Court – without hearing any evidence or argument – decided to allow it to go forward. So while the case continues to be argued, thousands of trans troops will be purged from the Armed Forces.
“They will lose their jobs. They will lose their commands, their promotions, their training, pay and benefits, and time. Their units will lose key players; the mission will be disrupted. This is the very definition of irreparable harm.”
Imara Jones, CEO of TransLash Media, issued the following statement:
“The Supreme Court’s decision to uphold Trump’s ban on transgender soldiers in the military, even as the judicial process works its way through the overall question of service, signals that open discrimination against trans people is fair game across American society.
“It will allow the Trump Administration to further advance its larger goal of pushing trans people from mainstream society by discharging transgender military members who are currently serving their country, even at a time when the military has struggled recently to meet its recruiting goals.
“But even more than this, all of my reporting tells me that this is a further slide down the mountain towards authoritarianism. The hard truth is that governments with authoritarian ambitions have to separate citizens between who is worthy of protection and who’s not. Trans people are clearly in the later category. And this separation justifies the authoritarian quest for more and more power. This appears to be what we are witnessing here and targeting trans people in the military is just a means to an end.”
-
The Vatican2 days ago
American cardinal chosen as next pope
-
a&e features3 days ago
Your guide to the many Pride celebrations in D.C. region
-
U.S. Supreme Court4 days ago
Supreme Court allows Trump admin to enforce trans military ban
-
District of Columbia4 days ago
WorldPride permits for National Mall have yet to be approved