Politics
Biden to leave office revered as most pro-LGBTQ president in history
Long record of support from marriage to trans rights
President Joe Biden will leave the White House next week after leading what advocates consider to be the most pro-LGBTQ administration in American history.
The past four years offer a wealth of evidence to support the claim, from the passage of legislation like the landmark Respect for Marriage Act to the promotion of LGBTQ rights abroad as a cornerstone of U.S. foreign policy, impactful regulatory moves in areas like health equity for gay and trans communities, and the record-breaking number of gender and sexual minorities appointed to serve throughout the federal government and on the federal bench.
As demonstrated by the deeply personal reflections that he shared during an exclusive interview with the Washington Blade in September, Biden is especially proud of his legacy on LGBTQ rights and believes that his record reflects the bedrock principles of justice, equality, and fairness that were inculcated by his father’s example and have motivated him throughout his career in public life.
For instance, during a trip to New York in June, where he delivered remarks to commemorate the opening of the Stonewall National Monument Visitor Center, Biden explained he was deeply moved by the “physical and moral courage” of those early gay rights activists, adding that the monument honoring their sacrifices “sets an example” in the U.S. and around the world.
Likewise, Biden told the Blade he decided to publicly express his support for same-sex marriage in the midst of his reelection campaign with then-President Barack Obama in 2012 because of his experience attending an event hosted by a gay couple with their children present.
“If you saw these two kids with their fathers, you’d walk away saying, ‘wait a minute, they’re good parents,’” he said. From that moment forward, Biden was unwilling to continue to demur, even if that meant preempting Obama’s “evolution” toward embracing marriage equality.
To fully appreciate Biden’s leadership — especially during his presidency, and particularly on issues of transgender rights — it is worth considering his record against the backdrop of the broader political landscape over the past four years.
By the time he took office in 2021, conservative activists and elected leaders had positioned the trans community at the center of a moral panic, introducing hundreds of laws targeting their rights and protections and exploiting the issue as a strategy to undermine support for Democrats.
In the face of unrelenting attacks from his Republican political adversaries, Biden set to work building an administration that “looked like America” including with the appointment of trans physician and four-star officer Dr. Rachel Levine to serve as assistant health secretary, and on day one he issued an executive order repealing his predecessor’s policy that excluded trans Americans from military service.
As the 2024 election neared, with Donald Trump’s campaign weaponizing transphobia as a wedge to score votes, Biden’s support remained vocal and sustained. In each of his four State of the Union addresses to joint sessions of Congress, for example, the president reinforced his commitment to “have the trans community’s back.”
Meanwhile, midway through his term the U.S. Supreme Court overturned abortion protections that were in place since Roe v. Wade was decided in 1973, with conservative statehouses across the country taking the opportunity to pass draconian restrictions.
Democrats sought to exploit the unpopular abortion bans, especially as the presidential race was in full swing, but many were concerned that Biden might be an ineffective messenger because of his personal opposition to the practice as a devout Catholic.
While he directed his administration to take measures to protect access to abortion in the U.S. and spoke publicly about the importance of reproductive autonomy and the freedom to access necessary medical care for family planning, the Associated Press reports that as of March 2024, Biden had only used the word “abortion” in prepared remarks once in four years.
The daylight between how the president has talked about transgender rights and how he has talked about abortion offers an interesting contrast, perhaps illuminating how impervious Biden can be when pressured to compromise his values for the sake of realizing his political ambitions, while also demonstrating the sincerity of his conviction that, as he put it in 2012, anti-trans discrimination is “the civil rights issue of our time.”
Biden was scheduled to deliver a farewell address to the nation on Wednesday evening.
The White House
HRC files class action over federal ban on gender-affirming care coverage
Lawsuit filed Monday challenges White House effort to restrict care
The Human Rights Campaign Foundation, the nonprofit sister organization to the largest LGBTQ human rights lobbying and advocacy organization in the U.S., along with law firms Correia & Puth and Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll, filed a class action lawsuit against the government as it attempts to restrict gender-affirming healthcare for federal employees.
The suit, filed on Monday, alleges that the Office of Personnel Management, run by Trump appointee Scott Kupor, is discriminating against LGBTQ federal employees (and their families and retired employees) by prohibiting health insurance coverage for gender-affirming care under the Federal Employees Health Benefits and Postal Service Health Benefits plans. There are five plaintiffs named in the complaint, but it extends to others who have those healthcare plans.
The document asserts that OPM’s prohibition on coverage for “gender transition” care in the FEHB and PSHB programs violates Title VII, the federal law that prohibits discrimination based on sex, race, color, religion, or national origin.
The policy, which was implemented on Jan. 1 following the 2025 issuing of Program Carrier Letter, mandated that insurance providers in these programs deny any coverage for gender-affirming care. In February, HRC filed a federal complaint with OPM over the change in healthcare policy, which was ultimately passed to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission for review. That complaint is now an officially filed class action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.
Research from the Williams Institute at UCLA Law, a think tank that collects data and conducts research on issues related to sexual orientation and gender identity, indicates that this policy denying gender-affirming care will impact healthcare access for at least 39,400 current and former federal employees and their dependents.
Human Rights Campaign President Kelley Robinson released a statement following the lawsuit’s filing.
“Our message to the Trump administration is simple: we’ll see you in court,” said Robinson. “Healthcare access should never be weaponized to advance discrimination — and the denial of coverage for critical healthcare based simply on who you are blatantly violates the rights of all of us.”
Gender-affirming care has been under constant attack by the Trump-Vance administration since its return to the White House, despite the practice being considered as extensively evidence-based but also supported by nearly every major medical organization. This type of care is provided to all people—not just transgender people—and includes things such as social affirmation, including using correct names and pronouns and wearing clothing that matches a person’s gender identity; mental health support, such as counseling to reduce depression and anxiety; and, in some cases, medical interventions such as reversible puberty blockers or hormone therapy when deemed medically appropriate.
“Federal employees have been through the wringer with the Trump administration,” said Cathy Harris, partner at Correia & Puth. “We draw the line at blatant discrimination to deny healthcare to our nation’s dedicated civil servants.”
“This odious policy is the latest example of the Trump administration’s obsession with targeting transgender people, using shameful and cruel tactics to threaten their employment, their health, and the well-being of themselves and their families,” Robinson added. “OPM’s actions will not go unchallenged, and we’ll continue to fight so that federal employees and their families receive the dignity they deserve.”
This is not the first time the White House has directly attacked gender-affirming care.
In January 2025, the administration issued Executive Order 14187, titled “Protecting Children from Chemical and Surgical Mutilation.” The order directs federal agencies to restrict gender-affirming medical care — including puberty blockers, hormone therapy, and surgeries — for individuals under the age of 19.
For more information on how to get involved with the lawsuit, visit hrc.org.
Politics
Buttigieg indicates he may run for president in 2028
Former Transportation Secretary was in Biden-Harris administration’s Cabinet
Former Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg told a podcaster he is considering throwing his hat in the ring for president once again.
“I don’t know,” Buttigieg told Steven Bartlett, the British host of The Diary of a CEO, the most popular top business and tech podcast on Spotify, which aired Monday. “I think I’m more inclined than not, but there’s so much we don’t know.”
“There’s so much I don’t even know about what’s going to happen this year, let alone … what we need to know later,” he added.
Buttigieg is no stranger to running for the Oval Office.
In 2019, the former South Bend, Ind., mayor was a serious contender in the Democratic primary for the 2020 presidential election but ultimately ended his campaign and endorsed Joe Biden.
In May, an Emerson College Polling survey found Buttigieg at the top of the list of potential presidential contenders, leading California Gov. Gavin Newsom, New York Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, former Vice President Kamala Harris, and others.
In addition to discussing his future in federal politics, Buttigieg also discussed President Donald Trump’s handling of the Iran war — which reached its 5-month mark two weeks ago — the changing landscape of U.S. jobs due to the rise of artificial intelligence, and the growing national debt, all issues he could face if he ultimately returns to the White House.
Following his 2020 presidential campaign, Buttigieg gained prominence within the Democratic Party, eventually leading to his confirmation as Transportation Secretary. In February 2021, he became the first openly gay Cabinet member to be confirmed by the U.S. Senate.
In addition to his experience as an elected official, the 44-year-old served as a Navy intelligence officer in the reserves from 2009-2017, including a seven-month deployment to Afghanistan in 2014. Buttigieg came out as gay in 2015 and later married his husband, Chasten Glezman, in 2018. The couple now has two children: twins.
Buttigieg also has an extensive educational background.
He graduated from Harvard University with a bachelor’s degree in history and literature and later became a Rhodes Scholar, attending the University of Oxford, where he earned a bachelor’s degree in philosophy, politics, and economics.
This is not the first time Buttigieg has made headlines this year.
In June, he went public about being falsely accused of posing a threat to his children’s safety. An anonymous police report claimed he was a danger to his 4-year-old twins and was not allowed to be with them until after police interviews were conducted.
The police report was later determined to be false. The Washington Blade reached out to the Michigan State Police to ask what course of action, if any, would be taken against the woman who filed the false report, but the agency did not answer the question.
The Blade reached out to Buttigieg’s team for comment on his potential 2028 presidential bid, but did not hear back before publication.
Congress
House blocks effort to codify transgender servicemember ban into law
Lawmakers approved two anti-trans NDAA amendments
The U.S. House of Representatives on Tuesday rejected an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act that would have codified a ban transgender servicemembers in the military.
The bipartisan vote was 212-217.
The NDAA is for the 2027 fiscal year and sets policies for the Defense Department programs and activities and the national security programs of the Department of Energy.
U.S. Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-Colo.) proposed the amendment on July 21. It stated that all personnel are required to serve in accordance with their biological sex, citing military readiness and discipline.
Human Rights Campaign Senior Director of Government Affairs Jennifer Pike Bailey stated that she is grateful for the bipartisan vote that rejected President Donald Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s “dangerous and discriminatory policy that has kicked brave transgender servicemembers out of the military and weakened our national security.”
“Everyone who meets the same rigorous standards should be able to serve their country. We should honor that patriotism, particularly in this moment where we are witnessing brave servicemembers making the ultimate sacrifice for our country, instead of ending their careers and politicizing their existence. We’re grateful that a permanent extension of this ban failed, and we will keep fighting to reverse this senseless policy,” Bailey said.
Mark Takano, chair of the Congressional Equality Caucus, stated that he and his members put in countless hours of work to kill the amendment.
“When Americans know they or their families are going to be targeted by or not supported by the military, that leads them to avoid signing up to serve or staying in the service — making it harder to keep the ranks of the armed services full and our nation safe. My colleagues in the Equality Caucus and I will continue working to prevent these attacks on our servicemembers and their families from becoming law,” Takano said.
According to the Congressional Equality Caucus, two other bills could potentially be passed that would also target the transgender community, both of which were proposed by U.S. Rep. Nancy Mace (R-S.C.).
The first was a bill that would have prohibited gender-related medical care under TRICARE and to prevent TRICARE from covering certain gender-related medical procedures and treatments, which was approved in a vote of 219-208.
The second was a bill that would have prohibited male participation in female sports at DoDEA schools. DoDEA schools are Department of Defense Dependents Schools, which is a network of primary and secondary schools.
The amendment was approved in a vote of 221-203.
HRC files class action over federal ban on gender-affirming care coverage
Perez Hilton’s live breakdown reveals social media mental health crisis
Mr. Henry’s to host 60th anniversary party
Calendar: August 7-13
Greg Araki still wants your sex
Madonna headlines World Pride Music Festival in Amsterdam
PHOTOS: Petal Release Party
My evening with Madonna
Remembering Elliot Leonard, generous visionary who helped LGBTQ communities thrive
