National
Which Republican will Baldwin face in Wis. Senate race?
GOP competition comes to an end Tuesday

Wisconsin residents will cast their votes on Tuesday in an open primary for one of several contenders seeking the Republican nomination to run for a U.S. Senate seat. The winner will go on to challenge presumptive Democratic nominee Tammy Baldwin in her bid to become the first openly gay U.S. senator.
The four main contenders — former Wisconsin Gov. Tommy Thompson, hedge fund manager Eric Hovde, former congressman Mark Neumann and Wisconsin Assembly Speaker Jeff Fitzgerald — have almost uniformly adopted anti-LGBT positions, including support for a U.S. constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage throughout the country.
The exception is Thompson, who stopped short of backing a Federal Marriage Amendment, but said he supports the Defense of Marriage Act. Thompson also said he opposes workplace discrimination, but hasn’t announced support for the Employment Non-Discrimination Act.
The latest polls give the lead to Hovde, a relative newcomer to the race who’s spent millions of his own money. According to a Public Policy Poll published Friday, Hovde leads with 27 percent support, followed by Thompson at 25, Neumann at 24 and Fitzgerald at 15.
The Wisconsin Senate primary isn’t the only race of interest in the state for the LGBT community. Wisconsin Assembly member Mark Pocan is in a contest with fellow Assembly member Kelda Helen Roys for the Democratic nomination to represent Wisconsin’s 2nd congressional district in Congress. The Washington Blade will have updates Tuesday evening on both of these races.
Tommy Thompson
Past positions: former Wisconsin governor, secretary of Health and Human Services under former President George W. Bush, candidate for Republican nomination for president in 2008 election
Polling with Baldwin: CBS/NYT/Quinnipiac poll, Baldwin ties Thompson, 47-47; Marquette University poll, Thompson leads Baldwin 48-43
Fundraising info: Net receipts: $2,467,185; net expenditures: $2,114,270; Self-financing: $132,500 (5%); cash on hand: $352,915
Positions on LGBT issues:
• In the 2008 presidential debate, Thompson said “yes” when asked if he thinks employers should be able to fire employees for being gay:
“I think that is left up to the individual business. I really sincerely believe that is an issue that business people have to got to make their own determination as to whether or not they should be.”
• Immediately afterward, Thompson retracted the statement in a clarification to CNN. He said he supports Wisconsin statewide law against sexual orientation discrimination, but stopped short of endorsing the Employment Non-Discrimination Act:
“I made a mistake. I misinterpreted the question. I thought that I answered it yes when I should have answered it no. I didn’t hear, I didn’t hear the question properly and I apologize. It’s not my position. There should be no discrimination in the workplace and I have never believed that. And, in fact, Wisconsin has one of the first laws, which I supported.
• Headed former President George W. Bush’s domestic effort against HIV/AIDS as HHS secretary, renewing Presidential Advisory Council on HIV/AIDS, announcing approval of rapid testing and directing funds to confront the epidemic.
• On Aug. 3, told CBS 58 in Wisconsin he opposes same-sex marriage and supports “the Defense of the Marriage Act,” but stopped short of supporting a Federal Marriage Amendment:
“I believe very strongly in the Defense of the Marriage Act. Marriage is one man and one woman. I support that. That’s the federal law. I’m a little gun shy of people saying, ‘We got to have constitutional amendments for this or that. I happen to like our Constitution, and, I think, you should not be going around amending constitutions. I am very much in favor of the Defense of the Marriage Act, the federal Defense of the Marriage Act, and that’s what should have, and gay marriage should be left up to the states. This is not a federal thing; this is a state thing. And so let’s leave the constitution out of it, let’s defend the federal law, one man, one woman for marriage, and allow the states to determine what they want to do on this subject.”
Eric Hovde
Past positions: hedge fund manager, no previous public office
Polling with Baldwin: CBS/NYT/Quinnipiac poll, Baldwin leads Hovde 47-43; Marquette University poll, Baldwin leads Hovde 44-41
Fundraising info: Net receipts: $5,532,185; net expenditures: $4,945,880; Self-financing: $5,100,000 (92%); cash on hand: $586,304
Positions on LGBT issues:
• endorsed by the anti-gay group Wisconsin Family Action
• On Aug. 3, told Wisconsin’s CBS 58 he backs a Federal Marriage Amendment on the grounds of protecting religious liberties:
“Yes, I would. I believe marriage is between a man and a woman. That is my belief. In fact, if you look at the history of marriage, it comes from the church, and I don’t think it’s the government’s position to come in and impose upon religion and tell them how they should believe or what they have to accept. I mean, that’s our First Amendment. It’s freedom of religion, it’s not freedom from religion, it’s freedom of religion. So, when people get married, they’ve always, through history, in front of God in a church. That is the church right to dictate and decide on what they feel is acceptable. So, I believe that marriage is between a man and a woman. And saying that, I don’t believe in discriminating against anyone, whether you’re gay or whatever. I don’t believe in any form of discrimination. But I do fundamentally marriage is between a man and a woman.”
Mark Neumann
Past positions: former U.S. House member, former candidate for governor and U.S. Senate
Polling with Baldwin: CBS/NYT/Quinnipiac poll, Baldwin leads Neumann 48-45; Marquette University poll, Baldwin ties Neumann 44-44
Fundraising info: Net receipts: $2,728,227; net expenditures: $2,537,482 self-financing: $235,000 (9%); cash on hand: $198,235
Positions on LGBT issues:
• As a U.S. House member, Neumann voted for the Defense of Marriage Act in 1996
• In 1996, told the New York Times he wouldn’t allow homosexuality if he were God:
“If I was elected God for a day, homosexuality wouldn’t be permitted, but nobody’s electing me God.”
• According to a 2007 Milwaukee Journal Sentinel story, he’s suggested he wouldn’t hire an openly gay staffer:
“In response to a question at a meeting of the Christian Coalition, Neumann said that if a job applicant came into his office and said he or she was homosexual, ‘I would say that’s inappropriate, and they wouldn’t be hired, because that would mean they are promoting their agenda.”
• On Aug. 3, told Wisconsin’s CBS 58 he supports Federal Marriage Amendment and DOMA, also criticized President Obama for “ignoring” DOMA (Obama actually enforces the law, but doesn’t defend it in court):
“I would certainly support a constitutional amendment that defines marriage as a relationship between one man and one woman, the way it has been through the whole history of the United States of America. … When I was in Congress I was happy to work to pass the Defense of Marriage Act, which did exactly that, and it’s unfortunate that Barack Obama in his own actions has decided to simply ignore the law that is on the books called the Defense of Marriage Act. … Being president of the United States does not empower you to do as you see fit; there are still laws of the land and you’re sworn to uphold those laws of the land.
Jeff Fitzgerald
Past positions: speaker of the Wisconsin Assembly
Polling with Baldwin: CBS/NYT/Quinnipiac poll, Baldwin leads Fitzgerald 51-39; Marquette University poll, Baldwin leads Fitzgerald 45-40
Fundraising info: Net receipts: $159,021; net expenditures: $115,517; self-financing: $0 (0%); cash on hand: $39,368
Positions on LGBT issues:
• Voted for statute against same-sex marriage in 2003 as well as constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage in 2004 and 2006
• Voted to strip domestic partnerships — both the benefits and the registry in the same amendment — from the budget in 2009
• On Aug. 3, told Wisconsin’s CBS 58 that he ‘d back a Federal Marriage Amendment:
“Yeah, and I have in the state. We had a constitutional amendment here in the state. I believe marriage should between one man and one woman and I would stick by that on the federal level as well.”
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