National
Santorum wins in Alabama, Mississippi
Gingrich fades; Romney takes Hawaii

Republican presidential hopeful Rick Santorum scored two wins in the GOP primaries on Tuesday by adding Alabama and Mississippi to his column after prevailing in Kansas over the weekend.
The former U.S. senator, who’s known for his strong opposition to same-sex marriage and other anti-gay views, edged out his competitors in the most recent contests — former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, former U.S. House Speaker Newt Gingrich and libertarian Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas).
In Alabama, Santorum won 35 percent of the vote with 98 percent of precincts reporting. Gingrich and Romney were tied with 29 percent of the vote.
In Mississippi, with 99 percent of precincts reporting, Santorum captured 33 percent of the vote, while Gingrich had 31 percent and Romney had 30 percent. Hawaii also held a contest on Tuesday; Romney won there with 45 percent of the vote to Santorum’s 25 percent and Gingrich’s 11.
Speaking at his campaign headquarters at Lafayette, La., Tuesday night, Santorum told supporters, “We did it again.”
“The most common thing I heard from people — and I know I’m not alone — is people come up and say, ‘I’m praying for you,'” Santorum said. “I just want to thank you for that. I want to thank God for giving us the strength everyday to go out there and to be clear in our message and our vision for this country.”
Santorum said the “best chance” for Republicans to win the November election is to nominate a conservative — likely a reference to Romney, who’s viewed as a more moderate candidate — and said he expects to have “a huge win” in the Louisiana primary, which will have its contest on March 24.
Hastings Wyman, who’s gay and editor of the Southern Political Report, said the results on Tuesday give Santorum “a big boost” — mostly because they show Santorum’s competitor as the anti-Romney alternative, Gingrich, has run out of steam.
“It sends a strong message to Gingrich that it’s time he got out,” Wyman said. “I don’t know whether he will or not, but if he can’t win those two states, there’s nowhere else he can win really.”
Although Romney has amassed more delegates leading up to the convention than either Santorum or Gingrich, Wyman said Santorum’s wins show he continues to have strength and could give Romney a run for his money for the Republican presidential nomination.
“I think Santorum is going to give Romney a strong race,” Wyman said. “He’s more youthful. The polls show he does very well with women, and think that’s because they find him personally attractive. I don’t mean some sort of sexually way, or anything like that. It’s just he’s young and handsome and they kind of like him. Romney’s too aloof, Gingrich is too cerebral, Paul is kind of the class nerd. I think Santorum comes across as somebody they really like.”
The candidate’s wins on Tuesday build off of his win on Saturday in the Kansas caucuses. Santorum won a majority of the vote in the state, while Romney came in a distant second with 20.9 percent of the vote.
But Thomas Witt, chair of the Kansas Equality Coalition, said he doesn’t think Santorum’s win in the state amounted to much because of the low turnout in the primary.
“I think there’s some perspective we can put Santorum’s victory in here,” Witt said. “There’s about 725,000 registered Republicans in the State of Kansas. Fewer than 30,000 participated in the caucuses. Of those, 15,000 voted for Santorum. That’s 2 percent of the Republicans in Kansas voting for Santorum. Polls have margins of error bigger than the number of Republicans that voted for him.”
Witt said he’s unaware of any anti-gay rhetoric that Santorum may have employed while campaigning in Kansas, which is known for being a socially conservative state. The activist said he followed news coverage carefully and talked to people at one of Santorum’s events in Topeka, but nothing related to LGBT issues came up.
Santorum is known for his opposition to LGBT rights. He’s signed a pledge from the National Organization for Marriage committing himself to back a U.S. constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage throughout the country, defend the Defense of Marriage Act in court and establish a commission of “religious liberty” to investigate the alleged harassment of those opposed to same-sex marriage. He has also said he would restore “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” if elected president.
Other contests on Saturday took place in U.S. protectorates: Guam, the Northern Mariana Islands and the U.S. Virgin Islands. Romney won in the first two places. Paul won the Virgin Islands, but Romney took more delegates because of the system there.
The next contest is set to be the Missouri caucuses on Thursday. Santorum won the primary in the state on Feb. 7, but his win was symbolic because delegates weren’t awarded then. Missouri has 52 delegates up for grabs during its caucuses. Following Missouri, the next contest will be Puerto Rico on Friday, Illinois on Sunday and Louisiana on March 24.
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 Vatican12 hours ago
American cardinal chosen as next pope
-
a&e features18 hours ago
Your guide to the many Pride celebrations in D.C. region
-
U.S. Supreme Court2 days ago
Supreme Court allows Trump admin to enforce trans military ban
-
District of Columbia2 days ago
WorldPride permits for National Mall have yet to be approved