More than two dozen activists gathered in front of the Hungarian Embassy in D.C. on Friday to protest the country’s ban on Budapest Pride and other LGBTQ-specific events.

Amnesty International USA Executive Director Paul O’Brien read a letter that Dávid Vig, executive director of Amnesty International Hungary, wrote.

“For 30 years Budapest Pride has been a celebration of hope, courage, and love,” said Vig in the letter that O’Brien read. “Each march through the streets of Budapest has been a powerful testament to the resilience of those who dare to demand equality, but a new law threatens to erase Pride and silence everyone who demands equal rights for LGBTI people.”

“The Hungarian government’s relentless campaign against LGBTI rights represents a worrying trend that can spread normalizing division and hatred,” added Vig. “Thank you for standing with us when we refuse to be intimidated.”

Council for Global Equality Chair Mark Bromley and two of his colleagues — Stephen Leonelli and Keifer Buckingham — also spoke. Health GAP Executive Director Asia Russell and Chloe Schwenke, a political appointee in the Obama-Biden administration who worked for the U.S. Agency for International Development, and Planned Parenthood staffers are among those who attended the protest.

(Washington Blade video by Michael K. Lavers)

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 in April amended the Hungarian constitution to ban public LGBTQ events.

Budapest Pride is scheduled to take place on Saturday, despite the ban. Hundreds of European lawmakers are expected to participate.

“Sending strength to the patriotic Hungarians marching tomorrow to advance human dignity and fundamental rights in a country they love,” said David Pressman, the gay former U.S. Ambassador to Hungary, on Friday on social media.

Sending strength to the patriotic Hungarians marching tomorrow to advance human dignity and fundamental rights in a country they love. Szabadság és szerelem. My past remarks on Budapest Pride: https://t.co/y1QhA9QouA

— David Pressman (@AmbPressman) June 27, 2025

The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday upheld a portion of the Affordable Care Act requiring private health insurers to cover the cost of preventative care including PrEP, which significantly reduces the risk of transmitting HIV.

Conservative Justice Brett Kavanaugh authored the majority opinion in the case, Kennedy v. Braidwood Management. He was joined by two conservatives, Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Amy Coney Barrett, along with the three liberal justices, Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown-Jackson.

The court’s decision rejected the plaintiffs’ challenge to the Affordable Care Act’s reliance on the U.S. Preventative Services Task Force to “unilaterally” determine which types of care and services must be covered by payors without cost-sharing.

An independent all-volunteer panel of nationally recognized experts in prevention and primary care, the 16 task force members are selected by the secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services to serve four-year terms.

They are responsible for evaluating the efficacy of counseling, screenings for diseases like cancer and diabetes, and preventative medicines — like Truvada for PrEP, drugs to reduce heart disease and strokes, and eye ointment for newborns to prevent infections.

Parties bringing the challenge objected especially to the mandatory coverage of PrEP, with some arguing the drugs would “encourage and facilitate homosexual behavior” against their religious beliefs.

The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday ruled that public schools must give advance notice to parents and allow them the opportunity to opt their children out of lessons or classroom instruction on matters of gender and sexuality that conflict with their religious beliefs.

Mahmoud v. Taylor was decided 6-3 along party lines, with conservative Justice Samuel Alito authoring the majority opinion and liberal Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown-Jackson in dissent.

Parents from diverse religious backgrounds sued to challenge the policy in Maryland’s Montgomery County Public Schools when storybooks featuring LGBTQ characters were added to the elementary school English curriculum in 2022.

The school board argued in the brief submitted to the Supreme Court that “the storybooks themselves do not instruct about gender or sexuality. They are not textbooks. They merely introduce students to characters who are LGBTQ or have LGBTQfamily members, and those characters’ experiences and points of view.”

Advocacy groups dedicated to advancing free speech and expression filed amicus briefs in support of the district.

PEN America argued the case should be viewed in the context of broader efforts to censor and restrict what is available and allowable in public schools, for instance by passing book bans and “Don’t Say Gay” laws.

The ACLU said the policy of not allowing opt-outs is religion-neutral, writing that the Supreme Court should apply rational basis review, which requires only that the school district show that its conduct was “rationally related” to a “legitimate” government interest.

LGBTQ groups also objected to the challenge against the district’s policy, with many submitting amici briefs including: the National Center for Lesbian Rights, GLAD Law, Family Equality, COLAGE, Lambda Legal, the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, PFLAG., and the National Women’s Law Center.

The Human Rights Campaign did not submit a brief but did issue a statement by the group’s President Kelley Robinson: “LGBTQ+ stories matter. They matter so students can see themselves and their families in the books they read–so they can know they’re not alone.”

“And they matter for all students who need to learn about the world around them and understand that while we may all be different, we all deserve to be valued and loved,” she said. “All students lose when we limit what they can learn, what they can read, and what their teachers can say. The Supreme Court should reject this attempt to silence our educators and ban our stories.”