National
Gillibrand to introduce adoption anti-discrimination bill
First time bill brought forward in Senate
Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) is set to introduce legislation next week that would bar discrimination against prospective LGBT parents looking to adopt.
Gillibrand plans to introduce the legislation, known as the Every Child Deserves a Family Act, on Monday, according to her office. It would be first time the measure has been introduced in the Senate.
The bill would restrict federal funds for states if they have laws or practices allowing for discrimination in adoption on the basis of marital status, sexual orientation or gender identity.
In a statement, Gillibrand hailed her own state of New York for removing barriers in allowing LGBT parents to adopt and said other states should follow that example.
“New York is a leader on ensuring that any family can adopt children and sets a great example for the rest of the country,” Gillibrand said. “By removing all barriers for LGBT families to serve as foster parents, New York State has increased its foster parent pool by 128,000 prospective parents. This legislation would open thousands of new foster and adoptive homes to children ensuring they are raised in loving families.”
Original co-sponsors of the bill are Sens. John Kerry (D-Mass.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Patty Murray (D-Wash.), Al Franken (D-Minn.) and Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.). The bill is currently being scored by the Congressional Budget Office and will likely be sent to the Senate Finance Committee.
The Washington Blade previously reported in March that Gillibrand intended to introduce the adoption anti-discrimination bill. She didn’t formally announce her intentions until Friday.
According to Gillibrand’s office, most states permit single LGBT parents to adopt, but some don’t allow LGBT couples to do so. Five states prohibit same-sex couples outright from adopting: Utah, Mississippi, Louisiana, North Carolina and Michigan. Additionally, six states ban same-sex parents from adopting their partner’s children.
More than two dozen states have no laws on adoption for prospective LGBT foster and adoptive parents. According to Gillibrand’s office, the lack of non-discrimination policies in these states leaves potential LGBT parents vulnerable to agencies and case workers’ biases.
Companion legislation is sponsored in the House by Rep. Pete Stark (D-Calif.). As of Friday, the legislation had 76 co-sponsors. Among them is one Republican: Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Fla.).
In a statement, Stark praised Gillibrand for introducing the legislation in the Senate in time for the celebration of National Adoption Month in November.
“This legislation is about finding solid, permanent and loving homes for the 107,000 foster children waiting to be adopted,” Stark said. “That’s why 76 of my colleagues have joined me in sponsoring the House version. It is time to put the best interests of children first and remove all discriminatory barriers in our child welfare system.”
President Obama hasn’t yet endorsed the legislation, but the White House has said it supports the goals of the bill.
Shin Inouye, a White House spokesperson, said, “The president has long believed that we must ensure adoption rights for all couples and individuals based on their interest in offering a loving home, not based on discriminatory and irrelevant factors. He recognizes that adoptive families come in many forms, and that we must do all we can to break down barriers to ensure that all qualified caregivers have the ability to serve as adoptive families. While we have not reviewed this specific legislation, we share its goals and hope that the dialogue moves forward on this issue.”
An estimated 400,000 children are in the U.S. foster care system, and more than 107,000 children are waiting for adoption. In 2010, nearly 28,000 youth nationwide “aged out” of the foster care system without finding parents.
Advocates praised Gillibrand for introducing the legislation and said it would help both LGBT parents and children seeking homes.
Jennifer Chrisler, executive director of the Family Equality Council, said the legislation would address what she referred to as the “child welfare crisis in our country.”
“More than one-third of the children in foster care could be placed with a family right now, but state laws are eliminating loving and qualified parents simply because of their sexual orientation, gender identity or marital status,” Chrisler said. “Our country cannot continue to deny these children forever families because of the flawed patchwork of state laws.”
Linda Spears, vice president of policy and public affairs for the Child Welfare League of America, joined those praising Gillibrand.
“Far too many children in foster care have little hope for a permanent family and end up being parented by the government,” Spears. “We must support all qualified adults who are interested in providing a nurturing, adoptive home — regardless of their marital status or sexual orientation.”
Jeff Krehely, director of the LGBT research and communications project at the Center for American Progress, said Gillibrand’s bill “would have a tremendous and positive impact on people who are LGBT and want to adopt.”
“More importantly, it would really help the hundreds of thousands of kids who are in the foster care system and need forever homes,” Krehely said. “Too many states have laws and regulations that create barriers for LGBT people to adopt, which means more of these kids need to wait a long time before finding a family. This law would remove those barriers and make sure state laws finally catch up to the facts: LGBT people are just as good at parenting as people who are not LGBT.”
The Every Child Deserves a Family Act is modeled after the Multi-Ethnic Placement Act of 1994 as amended in 1996, which similarly prohibits states from receiving federal funds if they engage in racial or ethnic discrimination when placing children into homes.
National
DOJ seeks to dismiss some claims in gay FBI employee’s bias lawsuit
David Maltinsky was fired after displaying Pride flag at desk
Attorneys for gay former FBI employee David Maltinsky, who was fired from his job as a non-agent employee at the FBI’s Los Angeles Field Office in October 2025 after more than 16 years of service for displaying an LGBTQ Pride flag at his workstation, filed court papers on July 15 opposing a motion by government attorneys to dismiss some but not all of the provisions in his unlawful discrimination lawsuit seeking to overturn the firing.
Maltinsky’s lawsuit, filed in federal court in D.C. on Nov. 19, 2025, states that FBI Director Kash Patel acted illegally by violating Maltinsky’s First Amendment conditional rights and the U.S. Civil Rights Act of 1964 by ordering his firing on grounds that he “exercised poor judgement with an inappropriate display of political signage” by displaying the Pride flag.
The firing came at a time when Maltinsky successfully completed 16 weeks of the FBI’s 19-week training program at the FBI training academy in Quantico, Va. to become an FBI Special Agent, according to the lawsuit.
In addition to Patel, who took office as FBI director in February 2025 under the Trump administration, the lawsuit names as defendants the FBI itself, Acting U.S. Attorney General Todd Blanche, and the U.S. Department of Justice, which oversees the FBI.
“Defendants discriminated against Maltinsky for engaging in protected speech, for his sexual orientation, and for opposing discrimination – a clear and brazen violation of federal law and the Constitution,” the lawsuit states in an amended complaint filed May 5, 2026.
The Department of Justice, which is representing the FBI in its response to the lawsuit, did not immediately respond to a request from the Washington Blade for comment on the lawsuit and why it is seeking dismissal of some but not all of the lawsuit’s multiple allegations, including its claim that the firing violated Maltinsky’s First Amendment rights.
In its “Partial” motion filed on June 15, 2026, to dismiss some provisions in the lawsuit, the Justice Department through Assistant Attorney General Brett A. Shumate and Associate Branch Director Christopher Hall, stated that the lawsuit fails to provide sufficient evidence that Maltinsky was fired because he is gay.
“The Amended Complaint contains no factual allegations that Director Patel or any other decisionmaker expressed hostility toward gay employees, relied on Plaintiff’s sexual orientation in making employment decisions, even knew Plaintiff’s sexual orientation or otherwise indicated that Plaintiff’s status as a gay man played any role in the challenged actions,” the motion states.
Based on that, among other things, the motion says the lawsuit’s claim that the firing violated the U.S. Civil Rights Act of 1964 should be dismissed. A 2020 U.S. Supreme Court decision ruled that the 1964 law bans employment discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity along with its other categories including race, religion, and gender.
In its arguments that the decision to fire Maltinsky was illegal, unconstitutional, and unjust, the lawsuit’s amended complaint points out that FBI officials at the Los Angeles Field Office where Maltinsky worked presented the Pride flag to him and gave him full permission to display it at his workstation.
“The FBI encouraged and honored Maltinsky’s work by awarding him the 2020 Director’s Award For Excellence-Outstanding Service in Diversity and Inclusion,” the lawsuit says. “In 2022, the Attorney General for the Department of Justice awarded Maltinsky the Attorney General’s Award for Equal Employment Opportunity, DOJ’s highest award for performance in support of the Equal Employment Program,” it says.
“In special recognition of Maltinsky’s efforts to improve the FBI, in June 2021 LAFO [Los Angeles Field Office] leadership entrusted to Maltinsky two Pride flags that had been flown from the flagpole located in front of the LAFO,” the lawsuit complaint continues. “Maltinsky displayed one of those flags at his workstation.”
Although the lawsuit doesn’t say so directly, all of that happened during the administration of President Joe Biden and previous FBI Director Christopher Wray, who held the director’s position from August 2017 to January 2025, when Donald Trump took office as president.
Nathaniel Zelinsky, one of the attorneys representing Maltinsky regarding the lawsuit, told the Blade that because the Justice Department did not contest the lawsuit’s First Amendment provisions, the case will move forward to the discovery stage, in which he and fellow attorneys can seek and obtain government documents, and most likely go to trial. He said that regardless of whether the judge approves the dismissal of the lawsuit provisions the government has asked for, the other provisions and the case as a whole will continue.
“And those First Amendment claims are extremely serious,” he said. “The government, by its admission, fired David Maltinsky because they did not like the speech he displayed when he put up the Pride flag that was gifted to him by the FBI,” Zelinsky said. “The federal government cannot discriminate against its workers based on their speech.”
North Carolina
Authorities investigate officer-involved shooting outside Asheville gay bar
Incident took place near Shakey’s on Wednesday
An officer-involved shooting outside of a gay dive bar, Shakey’s, in downtown Asheville, N.C., left one man dead Wednesday.
The bar released a statement the following morning regarding the incident, stating that bar staff had asked a patron to leave earlier in the night citing concerning behavior. The bar said that later the man was spotted with a gun in the parking lot.
The bar proceeded to call 911, locked the doors to the establishment, and followed dispatcher instructions on how to keep patrons of the bar safe while officers arrived. These protocols included getting patrons away from the windows and staying low to the ground.
According to Shakey’s, shots were fired outside of the business. When the Asheville Police Department officers arrived, they fired back. The individual died from their injuries, according to the police.
“Because of everyone’s quick actions, cooperation, and concern for one another, every customer and every employee inside Shakey’s made it home safely. We are incredibly thankful,” Shakey’s said on their Instagram page. They thanked Asheville police, emergency dispatchers, EMS, and all first responders who were on scene.
On Thursday, a spokesperson for the North Carolina State Bureau of Investigation, Chad Flowers, stated that the suspect involved in the shooting was Arturo Castillo Palomar.
The Washington Blade reached out to the North Carolina State Bureau of Investigation for a comment regarding the possibility of the event being considered a hate crime. They said the issue is currently under investigation and that the findings would be turned over to the district attorney for review.
Pentagon
Hegseth announces testosterone initiative as trans troop ban continues
SPARTA Pride criticized Pentagon policy
The U.S. military will begin testing and treating service members with hormone therapy despite banning similar medical care for transgender service members.
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said Wednesday that troops ages 30 and older will be subject to annual testosterone screenings, while younger service members will have the option to voluntarily opt in. Some troops may then be recommended for hormone therapy, he explained in a video posted to social media.
“Under the supervision of our world-class medical professionals, warfighters age 30 and older are going to be tested annually as part of their periodic health assessment,” Hegseth said in a video posted to X, captioned “The High-T Department of War.”
This push to test testosterone levels, as the hormone is commonly referred to as “T,” runs counter to current medical guidelines. Physicians are generally advised to discuss testosterone therapy only with men who have symptoms consistent with low testosterone and documented low hormone levels on two separate blood tests.
Testosterone is a vital sex hormone that all humans naturally produce. It helps regulate muscle mass, bone density, and sex drive. In men, it is primarily produced in the testicles, while in women it is produced in the ovaries and adrenal glands.
Natural testosterone levels in men decline with age and have long been associated with issues such as erectile dysfunction, low libido, mood changes, and weight gain. However, experts continue to debate whether these conditions should routinely be treated with testosterone therapy.
Hegseth’s announcement aligns with other actions taken by the Trump-Vance administration — including efforts by Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. — to make testosterone therapy more accessible for men, particularly those assigned male at birth.
Last month, the Food and Drug Administration proposed easing prescribing restrictions on testosterone gels, pills, patches, and injections following a December advisory panel that recommended reducing regulatory hurdles to expand access to testosterone therapy.
Currently, FDA labeling specifies that these medications are approved only for men with hypogonadism, a medical condition that causes abnormally low testosterone levels.
The announcement came as a shock to many LGBTQ advocates because Hegseth and the Defense Department have cited the use of hormone therapy by trans service members as justification for their dismissal under President Donald Trump’s 2025 executive order, “Prioritizing Military Excellence and Readiness.“
The Pentagon continues to pursue implementation of the trans military ban as litigation proceeds. As a result, many trans service members have had their gender-affirming medical care halted, even as similar hormone therapy is now being expanded for cisgender service members. Under the executive order, the military currently disqualifies individuals diagnosed with gender dysphoria and has begun formal administrative separation proceedings for trans personnel.
SPARTA Pride, a nonpartisan nonprofit organization made up of trans service members, veterans, and their allies, issued a statement to the Washington Blade following Hegseth’s announcement.
“If hormone therapy helps warfighters perform at their best, then it cannot simultaneously be used as evidence that transgender service members are unfit to serve,” said Kara Corcoran, executive director of SPARTA Pride. “The same class of evidence-based medical treatment cannot be characterized as readiness-enhancing for one group and readiness-destroying for another.”
The legal fight over trans military service remains ongoing.
On June 1, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit ruled that trans service members already serving in the military could continue to do so, while allowing the armed services to continue refusing to enlist new trans recruits.
The Blade reached out to the Pentagon to ask why cisgender service members could receive hormone therapy while trans service members could not, but did not receive a response by the time of publication.
-
India5 days agoExpected India Supreme Court ruling could shape future LGBTQ rights cases
-
Venezuela5 days agoAdvocacy groups join Venezuela earthquake relief efforts
-
Congress4 days agoLindsey Graham has passed away. Do LGBTQ people have a right to celebrate his death?
-
a&e features4 days agoThe queer Asian comics building collective joy in D.C.

