National
Romney wins big in New Hampshire
Takes lead in South Carolina polls

MANCHESTER, N.H. — Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney earned his second victory in the race for the Republican presidential nomination on Tuesday by trouncing his competition in the New Hampshire primary.
Romney finished with 39.4 percent of the vote. Second place finisher, libertarian Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas), had 22.8 percent. Media outlets declared Romney the winner shortly after polls closed in the evening, unlike in Iowa, where a winner wasn’t declared until the wee hours of the morning.
Former Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman, Jr., came in third with 16.8 percent of the vote.
Standing before his family during a victory speech at Southern New Hampshire University, Romney accused President Obama of having run out of ideas and excuses in his leadership of the country.
“We still believe in the hope, the promise, and the dream of America,” Romney said. “We still believe in the shining ‘City on the Hill.’ We know that the future of this country is better than that 8 or 9 percent unemployment. It’s better than $15 trillion in debt. It’s better than the misguided and broken promises of the last three years, and the failed leadership of one man. The president has run out of ideas; now he’s running out of excuses.”
Romney concluded by looking to the next contest in South Carolina, saying, “Tonight, we’re asking the good people of South Carolina to join the citizens of New Hampshire and make 2012 the year he runs out of time.”
Former U.S. House Speaker Newt Gingrich finished fourth with 9.4 percent of the vote; former U.S. Sen. Rick Santorum was close behind in fifth place with 9.3 percent.
Santorum encountered an unfavorable reaction from some New Hampshire residents at his town hall meetings for stating his opposition to same-sex marriage. In one town hall, he said children would be better off having parents in prison rather than having parents of the same gender. Prior to his final campaign appearance in New Hampshire, Santorum was denounced as a “bigot” by Occupy protesters.
Gingrich also came under media scrutiny for incorrectly stating during a debate that the legalization of same-sex marriage in Massachusetts and D.C. “forced” the Catholic Church to close charitable services in those places. The church had volunteered to close those services.

Gay Republican presidential candidate Fred Karger at his N.H. victory party (Blade photo by Michael Key)
Gay GOP candidate Fred Karger — considered a long shot in the race — had earned 294 votes in the New Hampshire primary late Tuesday as results were still being tabulated.
Reflecting on his showing, Karger told the Washington Blade, “I’ve done this on my own. I’ve gotten no help from any organization or big donors.”
Karger said he’s setting his sights now on the Michigan primary, which will take place on Feb. 28. Karger, who touts himself as the only presidential candidate who supports full equality for LGBT people, said he’ll be one of 11 Republicans on the ballot and thinks he could be in a position take part in a debate for that primary.
Romney’s win could be significant because no other non-incumbent Republican candidate since the modern primary system was established has won the contests in Iowa and New Hampshire. According to recent polls, Romney is also polling in the lead in South Carolina, where the next primary will take place next week.
The decisive win for Romney in New Hampshire also stands in contrast to his extraordinarly narrow win in Iowa, where he claimed victory over Santorum by a margin of eight votes.
None of the candidates that Romney beat in the primary announced they would end their race on Tuesday. Despite his third place win, Huntsman vowed to continue his campaign to South Carolina, although polls have him in single digits in the more conservative state.
Gay conservatives lauded Romney for his victory and said the win helps cement Romney as the GOP nominee who’ll take on Obama in the general election.
R. Clarke Cooper, executive director of the Log Cabin Republicans, said the “definitive victory” for Romney in New Hampshire — coupled with the candidate’s win in Iowa — shows he can “unite Republicans and is a clear threat to Barack Obama in November.”
On Romney’s positions on LGBT issues, Cooper recalled remarks in recent debates in which Romney said he supports “full rights” for gay Americans.
“While he continues to support a constitutional amendment banning marriage equality — a position Log Cabin strongly opposes — he is also on record saying that such an amendment has been tried, rejected and is unlikely to ever succeed,” Cooper said. “Romney has also taken a position that the repeal of ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ has been settled, and he would not seek to reinstitute the ban on open service.”
Jimmy LaSalvia, executive director of GOProud, said Romney’s win demonstrates that his message of “economic renewal for America is resonating with Republican voters across the country.”
“Governor Romney’s win tonight is good news for all Americans – both gay and straight – struggling to make ends meet in this failed Obama economy and bad news for the president’s re-election prospects,” LaSalvia said.
LaSalvia endorsed Romney in an op-ed piece published last week in the Daily Caller, citing economic and tax policy as reasons to support the candidate. The endorsement was a personal one, and not on behalf on GOProud.
Cooper also praised Paul, saying his second-place showing “underscores New Hampshire’s commitment to the libertarian principles he has consistently championed,” and Huntsman for having “frequently talked about the need for Americans to do more for gay rights.”
But Jerame Davis, executive director of the National Stonewall Democrats, said political observers shouldn’t anoint Romney as the Republican presidential nominee.
“Romney’s prospects are looking up, but he hasn’t clinched the nomination by any means,” Davis said. “Keep in mind, this is only the second contest of many and more than 60 percent of the GOP vote went to someone other than Romney.”
Davis said Romney’s failure to win a majority of the vote demonstrates that the GOP is unable to get behind the candidate.
“Republicans just can’t get excited about him even if they ultimately accept him as their nominee, but can you blame them?” Davis said. “He’ll say anything to get elected. Just look at the way he’s pandered to LGBT voters and then disavowed having ever done so and you get a taste of his lack of conviction.”
Davis was referring to a 2002 Pride flier from Romney’s gubernatorial campaign promising equal rights that was disavowed by his presidential campaign after the candidate said during a debate Saturday he supports full rights for gay people.
The anti-gay National Organization for Marriage also praised Romney.
Brian Brown, NOM’s president, called Romney’s win “an impressive victory” and said the candidate’s opposition to same-sex marriage makes him an ideal candidate.
“We commend Mitt Romney on his impressive victory tonight in New Hampshire, adding to his delegate total following his victory in Iowa,” Brown said. “Mr. Romney has signed NOM’s pledge to take specific actions as president to defend traditional marriage. He has also called for the repeal of same-sex marriage in New Hampshire. Voters rewarded him and we congratulate Mr. Romney on his well-earned victory.”
Romney is among the Republican presidential candidates who’s signed NOM’s pledge to oppose same-sex marriage if elected president. Among other things, signing the document commits the candidate to back a Federal Marriage Amendment and to defend the Defense of Marriage Act in court.
NOM makes no mention in its statement of Paul’s second place showing. The organization had undertaken a $50,000 ad campaign to alert voters to the candidate’s opposition to the Federal Marriage Amendment and belief that government should get out of marriage. NOM had criticized Paul for his third place showing in Iowa after earlier polls showed him doing better there.
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 Vatican3 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