Marriage equality is officially the law of the land in Colorado after Democratic Gov. Jared Polis signed a law repealing a provision in the state constitution that banned marriage between same-sex couples.
Polis, an out gay man, signed SB25-014 into law Monday, also known as the Protecting the Freedom to Marry act. The bill repeals the provision in Colorado statute that states that marriage is valid only if it is between a man and a woman, which has been unenforceable since the 2015 U.S. Supreme Court decision Obergefell v. Hodges.
“Colorado is for everyone, no matter who you are or who you love. Last November, the voters got rid of outdated language in our constitution that banned same-sex marriage,” Polis said in a statement. “This is a long overdue step in the right direction and today’s law I’m signing ensures that Coloradans can marry who they love in our Colorado for all.”
Colorado voters approved an amendment to the state constitution in 2006 that stated only the union of one man or one woman could be considered a valid or recognized marriage. Voters later passed an amendment to overturn the ban in 2024 with 63 percent in favor.
The new law ensures that even if the Supreme Court reverses Obergefell, marriage equality will still be legal in Colorado. Marriages between same-sex couples would still be recognized federally under the Respect for Marriage Act, which mandates that the federal government recognize same-sex and interracial marriages, and that all states recognize those performed in other states. However, the act does not require states to allow marriages between same-sex couples, allowing them to enact bans.
While the Supreme Court has made no official move to reconsider marriage equality, nine states have recently introduced resolutions asking the court to hear the case again, citing similar constitutional amendments banning marriage between same-sex couples that were nullified by Obergefell.
Democratic State Senator Jessie Danielson, who introduced the bill in tandem with Democratic Representatives Brianna Titone and Lorena García, said in a statement that the law is especially important now as marriage equality comes under attack.
“The freedom to marry who we love is a fundamental right,” Danielson said. “I cannot sit back and allow Coloradans to have their marriages and families put at risk. It’s especially important now, as the Trump Administration attacks the LGBTQ community, to secure everyone’s right to live safely in our state, and marry whomever they love.”
A transgender military pilot filed a defamation lawsuit Wednesday against a conservative influencer who falsely claimed on social media that she was flying the helicopter that collided with a commercial jet near Reagan National Airport in January, killing 67 people.
“I want to hold this person accountable for what they did to me,” Jo Ellis, a pilot who has served more than 15 years in the Virginia Army National Guard, said in a statement to NBC News. “It’s become too common that people can say horrible things about someone, profit at their expense, and get away with it.”
Jo Ellis created a “proof of life” video after false claims on social media linked her to the plane crash near Reagan National Airport in January.Jo Ellis
On Jan. 30, less than 24 hours after the crash, conservative influencer Matt Wallace, who has 2.2 million followers on the social media platform X, shared a post from another account he operates stating that the helicopter pilot was transgender, according to the lawsuit. Wallace included a photo of Ellis, and the post went viral, the lawsuit states.
Wallace deleted that original post, according to the lawsuit, and then shared two others linking Ellis to the crash. One referred to an interview that Ellis did with The Smerconish Podcast, in which she said President Donald Trump’s executive order barring trans people from serving and enlisting in the military made her nervous.
The second post included photos of Ellis and said she might have participated in “another trans terror attack,” according to the lawsuit. That post received 4.8 million views on X, the suit states.
Wallace did not immediately return a request for comment regarding the allegations in the lawsuit.
“I understand some people have associated me with the crash in D.C., and that is false,” Ellis said in the Facebook video. “It is insulting to the families to try to tie this to some sort of political agenda. They don’t deserve that. I don’t deserve this. And I hope that you all know that I am alive and well, and this should be sufficient for you all to end all the rumors.”
Soon after Ellis’ statement on Facebook, Wallace shared another X user’s post with Ellis’ video, writing that it was an “Important Update!” and adding that Ellis was not piloting the helicopter and is still alive. Wallace also wrote in another X post that the original rumor that Ellis had been flying the helicopter involved in the crash came from another account with the handle @FakeGayPolitics, which is no longer active. Wallace said the rumor “seemed credible” because Ellis, whom Wallace misgendered in his posts, “wrote an article calling out Trump’s trans military ban only a few days ago.”
Ellis was not involved in the midair collision, the lawsuit states, did not write an article “calling out” Trump’s trans military ban and did not engage in “another trans terror attack.”
Equality Legal Action Fund, an LGBTQ legal organization representing Ellis, argues in the complaint that Wallace “concocted a destructive and irresponsible defamation campaign” against Ellis.
“The damage caused to Plaintiff by Defendant was instantaneous and immense,” the lawsuit continues. “Prior to Defendant’s campaign, Plaintiff was a private citizen who led a private life away from social media and the limelight. When Plaintiff awoke on January 31, 2025, she discovered she was the second most-trending topic in the United States on X with more than 90,000 posts mentioning her name or her likeness. Plaintiff was forced into the public sphere and can no longer remain a private citizen due to Defendant’s lies.”
Ellis said her life was “turned upside down” by Wallace’s posts.
“I feared for the safety of my family and myself and had to arrange private armed security,” she said in her statement to NBC News. “I’m now recognized in public and forever associated with that terrible tragedy over the Potomac. When I go out in public I have to look over my shoulder now.”
Ellis’ suit seeks damages for the injury to her reputation, though Ellis said she plans to donate any money that she wins from the suit to the families of the people who died in the crash.
Trans people have increasingly been falsely blamed for tragedies and violence in recent years, particularly after mass shootings. Since 2022, false or unconfirmed claims have linked trans people to mass shootings in Uvalde, Texas; Nashville, Tennessee; Philadelphia; Madison, Wisconsin; and Des Moines, Iowa.
In addition, since January, the Trump administration has enacted several policies targeting trans people, including the trans military ban, which states that being openly trans “is not consistent with the humility and selflessness required of a service member.” Two judgeshave temporarily blocked that policy from taking effect.
In his proclamation for National Child Abuse Prevention Month, rather than addressing real threats to children like the federal government should do, United States President Donald J. Trump focused almost exclusively on attacking supporters of transgender youth. He declared broadly defined “gender ideology” as “one of the most prevalent forms of child abuse” and labeled gender-affirming care as “evil”.
Gender-affirming care is recognized as the gold standard of medical care for transgender youth by majormedicalassociations. This care consists of social practices (changes to one’s name, wardrobe, etc.) to mental health counseling to medical interventions, such as puberty blockers and hormone therapies. In all, the care emphasizes a personalized, multidisciplinary, and gradual approach. Studiesdemonstrate that youth receiving this care experience 60 percent lower odds of depression and 73 percent lower odds of suicidality, with approximately 98 percent of youth continuing this care into adulthood.
Contrary to the proclamation’s assertions about the prevalence of gender-affirming care, a dataset of private insurance claims from 2018-2022 covering more than 5 million adolescents found that less than 3,000 transgender youth had access to puberty blockers or hormone therapies. Currently, 27 states ban some form of gender-affirming care for transgender youth.
A January 28, 2025, executive order aims to withdraw federal funds and support for such care to people younger than 19.
The proclamation’s language also echoes state-level efforts to weaponize child welfare systems against supportive families of transgender youth. In 2022, Texas Governor Greg Abbott ordered state agenciesto investigate parents whose children receive gender-affirming care, jeopardizing their custodial rights. This year, Texas and Montana advanced legislation to classify some or all gender-affirming care as child abuse.
The Supreme Court of the United States is scheduled to hear oral arguments in Mahmoud v. Taylor on Tuesday, April 22, 2025.
Mahmoud v. Taylor is about a small number of LGBTQ-inclusive children’s books included in the classrooms of Montgomery County (Maryland) Public Schools. The books were chosen and evaluated by education professionals. Six parents (three couples) sued the school district board of education claiming their religious freedom was violated by not having an option to opt out their children from classrooms where the books might be part of curriculum, including when offered as nonmandatory supplemental learning materials.
Context to know and report:
In 2022, Montgomery County Public Schools (MCPS) in Maryland expanded their curriculum book collection with nine inclusive picture books for children. An MCPS committee selected the titles and completed the necessary evaluation forms, which were then reviewed by a content supervisor, according to district protocol.
The school board stated in legal filings, “the books are made available for individual reading, classroom read-alouds, and other educational activities designed to foster and enhance literacy skills.
A district official said the books were to be integrated “into the curriculum in the same way that other books are used, namely, to put them on a shelf for students to find on their own; to recommend a book to a student who would enjoy it; to offer the books as an option for literature circles, book clubs, or paired reading groups; or to use them as a read aloud.”
The district’s communications director, Jessica Baxter, said the books tell “joyful stories of folks who happen to be part of the LGBTQ+ community,” and that they “celebrate and positively portray LGBTQ+ identities.”
Three couples filed a lawsuit against MCPS in 2023, objecting to the books and claiming the district infringed on their religious rights by not allowing them to opt out their children from potential exposure to the books.
The plaintiffs are represented by Becket, formerly known as Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, a legal group with an anti-LGBTQ history that includes representing a school that fired a 15-year veteran teacher for being gay and marrying her partner of 25 years. Southern Poverty Law Center describes Becket as a “hardline” group that promotes legislation and lawsuits to justify anti-gay discrimination. Becket has also vigorously pursued banning access to abortion and access to contraception.
People of faith support LGBTQ people and equality, and LGBTQ people are also people of faith. 67% of adult Americans say being LGBTQ should be accepted by society, including 59% of religiously-affiliated adults.
Two-thirds of U.S. Catholics, Protestants and other Christians oppose using religious beliefs as an excuse to discriminate against LGBTQ people.
24% of all LGBTQ parents live in the Northeast U.S., which encompasses Maryland. 31% live in the U.S. South. Approximately 5 million children in the U.S. are being raised by an LGBTQ parent. 20% of LGBTQ people in Maryland are raising children.
PEN America has documented more than 16,000 book bans in public schools nationwide since 2021, predominantly targeting books by and about LGBTQ people and books about people of color and race and racism. In its latest report Cover to Cover in February, the organization found 29% of all banned titles during the 2023-2024 school year featured LGBTQ+ characters, people, or themes.
PEN America has tracked tactics used to ban books across the country. Religious freedom arguments are the latest way to try to get books, especially with LGBTQ themes and characters, banned. Mahmoud v. Taylor has the potential to dramatically escalate book bans across the country by giving legal cover to discriminatory censorship, particularly targeting LGBTQ narratives.
The American Library Association (ALA) tracked414 book ban attempts against public school and library materials, encompassing 1,128 unique titles, in the first eight months of 2024.
The U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear the plaintiffs’ appeal after their requests to force the school district to provide opt outs while the case was being litigated lost in both the lower federal trial and appellate court. Federal Court of Appeals Judge Steven Agee noted there was no “evidentiary link showing that the Storybooks are being implemented in a way that directly or indirectly coerces the Parents or their children to believe or act contrary to their religious faith.”
The Supreme Court reached out to take this case at a very early stage and potentially decide it on a group of parents’ claims despite the fact that the case had not yet proceeded to the point where there was a record of how the books were actually being used in the classroom.
The authors and illustrators of books at issue in this lawsuit issued a statement in support of inclusive books: “We stand in support of the Montgomery County School District. We oppose censoring or segregating books, like ours, that feature LGBTQ+ people. All families deserve to be seen and heard. To act otherwise is harmful and sends a devastating message to students: that their lives and families are so offensive and dangerous that they can’t even be discussed in school.”
The books include the picture book Uncle Bobby’s Wedding, a celebration of family featuring a girl who finds that her favorite uncle’s marriage means she’s gaining another uncle, not losing one. The book was selected as a best picture book honoree by Kirkus Reviews. Author Sarah Brannen told Mombian’s Dana Rudolph: “Children need to see themselves in books. The books in the lawsuit need to be in the school and accessible to all the children in the school, without interference… we all know by now that banning books is the first step toward banning people.”
The authors of Jacob’s Room to Choose (about making schools and restrooms safe for all children) wrote in Time: “We believe that people have a fundamental right to practice and express their faith, but not when it harms others. Allowing families to opt their children out of reading our books hurts the children whose lives and families are reflected in those books. “Opt-out” policies starkly communicate to classrooms of children that behaving decently to all human beings is optional and tells kids who are different that they and their families don’t merit the respect of all their classmates.”
There has been prior precedent in the federal circuit courts ruling in favor of access to inclusive books. For example, in 2008, The U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal by two Lexington, Mass., couples, leaving in place a First Circuit Court of Appeals decision that, like four other federal circuit courts of appeals, held that participation in public school instruction cannot alone burden the right to free exercise of religion absent some “coercive effect.” The First Court held that merely exposing a child to ideas that conflict with the religious beliefs of their parents “does not inhibit the parent from instructing the child differently.”
Opt-out policies are costly for taxpayers, student education, and schools: “The administrative burden of having to notify parents, collect their responses, answer any questions they may have about the material, and determine what the opted-out students will do during class time when the LGBTQ books are read may dissuade schools from including LGBTQ books in the first place.”
Center for American Progress: Book bans “require tens of thousands of hours from teachers, librarians, and administrators to review the books and implement a system of censorship—all at a time when school resources are already stretched thin, and states across the country are facing teacher and staff shortages.”
First Book Research & Insights: A poll of 1,500 teachers and librarians revealed “book bans are negatively impacting their ability to teach,” undermine their expertise, and “contribute to a sense of erasing people and history.” Of the respondents, “72 percent noted that when students’ access to books is restricted, their reading engagement declines.”
EveryLibrary Institute: Polling and surveys reveal “a significant majority of the public opposes book bans, with a substantial majority of voters in some surveys supporting state legislation to protect individuals’ rights to read freely. Some surveys show that as many as three-quarters of voters believe that ensuring people have access to diverse books is essential. More than half of Americans appear to feel that book bans infringe on their right to make decisions for their children.”
ADDITIONAL RESOURCES
GLAAD offers the Book Bans: A Guide for Community Response and Actiontoolkit to inform the public about book challenges. This resource includes guidance on ways to organize, engage with the media, and prepare for public hearings.
The American Library Association (ALA) website features a banned books portal to share their research and data on book bans, spotlight each year’s most challenged books, and offer book résumés to help people in their efforts to defend the right to read.
PEN America tracks book bans in schools throughout the country and shares their findings in a report. Banned in the USA: Beyond the Shelves details the efforts to remove books from school libraries, shows where book challenges are occurring, and explores the subject matter of censored titles. PEN America’s Index of School Book Bans lists books banned in the 2023-24 school year.
The National Coalition Against Censorship’s Youth Censorship Database of K–12 student censorship incidents includes book challenges in schools and libraries, as well as censorship of student art, journalism, and other types of student expression in schools.
Inside the Department of Veterans Affairs — the nation’s most extensive health care system — a quiet rebellion seems to be growing.
Dozens of VA clinicians are breaking their silence, accusing the Trumpadministration of abandoning the very veterans they swore to serve. In a searing letter asking VA staff to sign on to an editorial circulating this week — and obtained by The Advocate — they describe a workplace transformed by fear, censorship, and cruelty. When The Advocate became aware of the document Friday afternoon, more than 50 clinicians whose details are being kept confidential out of fear of retaliation had signed it, according to a person with knowledge of its contents.
“Our leadership is failing Veterans,” they write.
This growing outrage follows a dramatic policy reversal last month. On March 17, VA Secretary Doug Collins — appointed by President Donald Trump — ordered the agency to end new prescriptions for hormone therapy and referrals for gender-affirming care for transgender veterans. The announcement was part of a broader rollback of LGBTQ+ protections across the federal government since day one of the second Trump administration that has systematically targeted trans and nonbinary people’s existence. The Advocate was the first to report on the rollback of policies around the dignified treatment of transgender vets.
Clinicians say the policy does not just cut off lifesaving health care — it signals to transgender veterans that they are no longer safe or welcome in a system designed to care for them.
Since the March directive, VA staff say they’ve been ordered to remove Pride flags and other LGBTQ-inclusive signage from hospitals, delete pronouns from staff bios, and report colleagues for using words like “transgender” or “LGBTQ+” in official communications.
It didn’t happen overnight. “It happened in small steps, as oppression often does,” the letter says.
But now the impact is unmistakable. Veterans — especially transgender veterans — are afraid to come back. Inside VA facilities, fear is spreading like wildfire. “People across facilities have been signing with the promise for anonymity,” a VA provider told The Advocate. The provider — speaking on condition of anonymity out of fear of retaliation — said some staff want to sign the letter but worry they could be fired if their names get out.
Their fear is not misplaced. Staff have been told to report on each other, the provider said.
In response to The Advocate’s request for comment, VA Press Secretary Peter Kasperowicz defended the rollback, calling it a “commonsense reform” that he said should have happened long ago.
“VA is phasing out treatment for gender dysphoria and directing all savings to helping paralyzed Veterans and amputees,” Kasperowicz said in a statement to The Advocate.
He added, “VA has received almost no criticism in response to this decision — proof that the vast majority of Veterans and Americans support it.”
But advocates and VA providers say that claim doesn’t hold up. Lindsay Church, a transgender Navy veteran and executive director of Minority Veterans of America, called Kasperowicz’s justification dishonest.
“VA has so far failed to produce any information about how much the department even spends on the treatment of gender dysphoria and therefore cannot redirect funding in this manner,” Church told The Advocate. “Furthermore, the provision of gender-affirming care transcends administrations, dating back to the first Trump administration. VA leadership is trying to deflect from their work gutting the department and the care veterans receive by targeting vulnerable veterans. Providers have voiced very real objection to the decision to rescind gender-affirming care — and to deny this is a lie.”
Clinicians say the damage has already been done inside the system. “Veterans — especially those who are transgender — now live in fear,” the letter reads. And staff do too.
For transgender veterans, the rollback of gender-affirming care feels like erasure — a political decision with life-or-death consequences. “How safe do I feel? Less than welcome,” retired Army Staff Sgt. Alleria Stanley recently toldThe Advocate. Stanley — a 20-year combat veteran who retired with full benefits after transitioning on active duty — said the message from the VA is clear.
“They just told transgender veterans, ‘You are not worthy,’” she said after the March announcement.
U.S. Rep. Mark Takano of California, ranking member of the House Committee on Veterans’ Affairs, praised the VA clinicians behind the letter and condemned the climate of fear emerging within the agency.
“I wholeheartedly support the views in this letter and deeply admire the courage of the VA clinicians who are putting the health care of veterans first by signing this letter,” Takano told The Advocate. “It’s not easy to step forward in the culture of fear of retaliation Secretary Collins is concocting across VA. Sharing truths, even uncomfortable truths, is an essential step in combating misinformation.”
Takano, who is also the chair of the Congressional Equality Caucus, added, “I stand with our LGBTQ+ veteran community, especially those facing transphobia, and will continue to fight for quality care for all veterans.”
Clinicians say they’ve seen the lifesaving power of gender-affirming care — veterans pulled back from the brink of suicide after starting hormone therapy, suffering lifted after years in darkness. Dr. Mary Brinkmeyer, a psychologist who resigned from her position as an LGBTQ+ care coordinator at the VA hospital in Hampton, Virginia, out of protest in February, is one of those who have seen the benefits of care and who fear for those who are denied it after having earned the care they need.
These new directives, the letter says, “break this promise.” Veterans made sacrifices “in body and soul” for their country, it continues — but the government is failing them. “Many are afraid to seek care at all, terrified they’ll be targets of humiliation or violence,” the clinicians write. Despite the climate of fear, the letter calls on VA leadership and the federal government to reverse course. “Get out of our lane,” the clinicians demand. Leave medical decisions where they belong: between patients and their providers.
“Over the years, Veterans have fought hard for the medical care they need, from care for Agent Orange to military sexual trauma,” the clinicians write. “Thanks to their efforts, the VA has made strides on treating post-traumatic stress disorder, reducing Veteran suicide, managing toxic exposures, and providing reproductive and gender-affirming care. We must uphold these advancements for allVeterans.”
The letter ends not in despair — but in defiance.
Clinicians vow to continue honoring their oath to care for all veterans — regardless of who they are, how they served, or how they identify. “We will not forsake the oath we took to provide care regardless of religion, nationality, race, age, gender, sexual orientation, disabilities, party politics, or social standing,” they promise.
“To our Veterans: please know that we vehemently oppose these orders and that even in this darkness, there is resistance,” they write.
“We will continue to treat you with the respect and dignity you were promised when you sacrificed in service of our country,” the letter says. And they leave no doubt about their message to transgender veterans facing discrimination and fear inside the VA.
“Here, in our clinics and hospitals, you are welcome, and you are not alone,” they pledge.
HIV advocates and public health experts are raising alarms after the Trumpadministration moved to remove all members of the Presidential Advisory Council on HIV and AIDS — a group that for three decades has provided critical guidance on federal HIV prevention, treatment, and care policy.
The decision, first reported by Reuters, comes amid sweeping cuts at the Department of Health and Human Services under Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., including layoffs of 10,000 federal health employees and the closure of half of HHS’s regional offices. The Trump administration eliminated several offices within HHS dedicated to infectious disease prevention, and the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has cut five branches of its HIV prevention division, affecting about 150 staff.
The removal of PACHA members comes at a time when HIV remains a significant public health challenge in the U.S., particularly for Black and Latine Americans, gay and bisexual men, and people living in the South.
About 1.2 million people in the U.S. are living with HIV, and roughly 13 percent of them don’t know their status, according to HIV.gov. In 2022 alone, an estimated 31,800 people in the U.S. acquired HIV. Nearly 70 percent of new infections were among Black and Latine people, and the South accounted for roughly half of all new cases.
This shift comes after the Biden-Harris administration had significantly expanded the federal government’s HIV response. In 2024, the White House highlighted a 12 percent decrease in new HIV infections nationwide from 2018 to 2022, driven in part by a 30 percent decrease among people ages 13 to 24. Federal efforts also led to a 16 percent decline in new infections in the South during the same period — a region long hit hardest by the epidemic. The administration also proposed a $9.8 billion National PrEP Program to expand access to HIV prevention medications for uninsured and underinsured individuals.
Now, HIV advocates fear that progress could stall — or reverse.
Current PACHA members told The Advocate they had not received formal notice of their removal but learned of the administration’s plans through media reports.
“My initial reactions are sad and disappointed,” said Dr. Philip Chan, a PACHA member and infectious disease physician at Brown University. “PACHA has been vital to advising HHS on the HIV response here in the U.S. It was great to be able to address HIV care and prevention issues at the national level — and I think just sad to no longer be part of that group.”
Chan told The Advocate that beyond the removal of PACHA members, the administration’s broader cuts to HIV prevention programs and research are deeply concerning. He said the administration recently canceled two of his NIH research grants — including one focused on HIV prevention among Black gay men.
He described a recent patient encounter that illustrates the real-world impact of what’s at stake. Chan said he recently had to deliver an HIV diagnosis to a Black gay man in Rhode Island who had previously been taking PrEP but lost access to the medication after losing his health insurance. In the short time he was off PrEP, the patient contracted HIV.
“It breaks my heart that we’re still seeing preventable HIV cases,” Chan said. “We have all the tools to end HIV. It just makes me sad to see a lot of this infrastructure being systematically dismantled across the country.”
Dr. Jirair Ratevosian, a current PACHA member and associate research scientist at the Yale School of Nursing, echoed those concerns, telling The Advocate the move risks sidelining science and community voices at a critical time.
“Every member of this PACHA accepted the call to serve with a deep commitment to improving the health and well-being of all Americans — especially the communities affected by HIV,” Ratevosian said. “Disrupting this work risks sidelining science and community voices at a critical moment in the fight to end the epidemic, both in the U.S. and globally. There remains a readiness to work in partnership with this administration to ensure that progress is not lost.”
Adrian Shanker, a former PACHA member and former deputy assistant secretary for health policy in the Biden administration, said that removing the council members is “devastating.” He explained that while PACHA members serve at the pleasure of the HHS secretary, the council’s charter allows members to serve up to four years — with flexibility for the secretary to divide that into terms of varying lengths, such as two two-year terms or a three-year term followed by a one-year renewal.
“PACHA is not a partisan council — its members are scientists, prevention advocates, and people living with HIV,” Shanker said. “It would have been wise for the administration to talk to PACHA before making such drastic and dangerous decisions.”
Carl Schmid, executive director of the HIV+Hepatitis Policy Institute and a former PACHA co-chair, said he wasn’t surprised by the removal of PACHA members.
“The real question is how quickly will they appoint new members and who will they be?” Schmid said.
Schmid said he is concerned about the broader direction the administration is taking on HIV policy.
“So far, this administration has moved quickly in decimating many parts of our nation’s HIV response, and we are afraid that there will be more cuts on the way,” Schmid told The Advocate. “We understand they will be forming an HIV component of the new administration for a Healthy America that will combine HIV prevention and treatment programs. In doing so, they must reiterate a commitment to ending HIV and provide the proper leadership, funding, and community input — including a new PACHA.”
HHS did not respond to The Advocate’s request for comment. However, a spokesperson for the agency told Reuters that removing PACHA members is common practice when a new administration takes office. The spokesperson added that HHS intends to continue receiving advice and recommendations on HIV policy and said the administration believes a new streamlined structure will be better positioned to address the epidemic.
The shake-up comes as the Trump administration is also reportedly preparing to eliminate all federal funding for domestic HIV prevention programs — a move experts have described as “catastrophic” and potentially devastating for public health. As The Advocate previously reported, the plan shutters the CDC’s HIV prevention division entirely and halts federally funded prevention efforts across the country, undoing decades of progress and leaving uninsured and marginalized communities without access to testing, PrEP, and lifesaving care.
During Trump’s first term, the administration launched the Ending the HIV Epidemic initiative, which contributed to a 12 percent decrease in new HIV infections between 2018 and 2022, according to HHS data. However, advocates fear that the latest actions could undo that progress.
“We are getting so close to ending the epidemic,” Chan said. “It would be sad to see us take a step back here when we’ve had so much good momentum and progress.”
The organizers of several of the country’s premier Pride celebrations told NBC News they have also lost funding from corporate sponsors this year, to the tune of $200,000 to $350,000 each. For some larger organizations — like those in New York City and San Francisco — the shortage makes up about 10% of their total Pride event budget, while for others, like St. Pete Pride in Florida, it could be about half.
Some organizers said past sponsors that are not returning or are reducing their sponsorship amounts this year have cited the political climate and the Trump administration’s hostility toward DEI and the LGBTQ community, while others have cited fear of an economic recession. Some didn’t provide any reasons at all, organizers said.
Bob Witeck, president of Witeck Communications, a firm specializing in LGBTQ marketing, said he isn’t surprised that corporations are reducing or withdrawing Pride sponsorships this year, because many of them are feeling vulnerable to “unfair and uninvited attacks.” He said publicly regulated businesses and those that work directly with federal agencies and under contracts “are more vulnerable to possible litigation as well as facing potential losses.”
Dykes on Bikes kicks off the annual San Francisco Pride march in 2019.Gabrielle Lurie / San Francisco Chronicle via AP file
Ford said several companies that had agreed to sponsor this year’s San Francisco Pride march had withdrawn: Anheuser-Busch, Comcast, Diageo and Nissan. Those sponsorships add up to about $300,000, Ford estimated.
The total budget for this year’s celebration, she said, is $3.2 million, and the nonprofit had hoped to raise about $2.3 million of that through corporate sponsorships, with the remainder coming from individual donations, beverage sales and other means. So far, corporate sponsors have committed $1.25 million, Ford said, adding that San Francisco Pride is still waiting to hear back from several large companies that have sponsored in the past.
Lloryn Love-Carter, a spokesperson for Nissan, said the company is “currently reviewing all marketing and sales spending, including auto shows, sports properties and other entertainment activations, to maximize both efficiency and breakthrough effectiveness.” Love-Carter added that “Nissan remains committed to promoting an inclusive culture for employees, consumers, dealers and other key stakeholders.”
A spokesperson for Diageo said there were some changes to the company’s sponsorships budget in California, but that the company was still going to be active around San Francisco for Pride Month in June and would be involved in Pride events around the country through its Smirnoff vodka brand.
A spokesperson for Comcast, which owns NBC Universal, the parent company of NBC News, declined to comment on why the company isn’t sponsoring San Francisco Pride this year. The spokesperson said local teams make their own sponsorship decisions and noted the company’s California team is sponsoring other Pride celebrations in the state including Silicon Valley Pride, Oakland Pride and events associated with San Francisco Pride that are hosted by other nonprofits.
Navigating a political and economic ‘tightrope’
Corporations began increasingly supporting Pride festivities in the years following the Supreme Court’s 2015 decision in favor of same-sex marriage. A few years ago, large companies had become so ubiquitous at major Pride events — with their logos emblazoned on everything from floats to paper fans — that some revelers began to lament the so-called corporatization of Pride, or what became known as “rainbow capitalism.”
However, over the last two years — as dozens of states have passed legislation restricting LGBTQ rights and conservative influencers have targeted pro-LGBTQ companies — the landscape has shifted, and some companies are leaning away from publicly supporting the community.
President Donald Trump further fueled the corporate retreat from Pride initiatives with a series of executive orders from his first day in office. In one order, Trump declared DEI initiatives “illegal and immoral” and barred the government from funding them. In another, he prohibited federal funds from promoting “gender ideology,” which has become a right-wing term to refer to transgender people and their rights.
At the same time, many big corporations are facing economic headwinds, including the Trump administration’s efforts to reduce government spending and the implementation of tariffs that have roiled the markets.
Byron Green, the board president of St. Pete Pride in St. Petersburg, Florida, said no sponsors have officially pulled their support for the annual event, though he hasn’t yet heard from many of them. Some have had to significantly reduce their sponsorships, Green said, including one major donor who previously gave $40,000 to $60,000 and is only donating about $10,000 this year.
“They have all said, ‘We get government funding, and we have to be very careful, because we don’t know if that funding is going to go away,’” Green said, adding that companies are worried about being able to pay their staff.
In the past, the nonprofit has relied entirely on corporate sponsors to cover the $600,000-$700,000 budget for Pride events held throughout the month of June, including its annual parade, which draws hundreds of thousands of attendees. So far, the nonprofit has received about half of that, according to Green.
“We are navigating what feels like a tightrope,” he said. “How do we create the experience that is the largest Pride in the state of Florida and one of the largest in the Southeast and the pace of dollars coming in is drastically less than it has been in the past?”
Ryan Bos is the executive director of Capital Pride Alliance, which organizes annual Pride celebrations in Washington, D.C., and will host this year’s WorldPride, an international celebration that is held in a new location every two years. Bos said the nonprofit was in talks with Target — which sponsored WorldPride in New York City in 2019 and has sponsored D.C.’s Capital Pride march in the past — but the company ultimately decided to pass.
Bos said other sponsors, like Wegmans Food Markets, have recommitted and increased their support for the festivities, which will take place from May 23 to June 8.
Kevin Kilbride, the media marketing manager of NYC Pride, said the budget for the organization’s annual Pride events in June is usually between $3 million and $6 million. Last year’s budget was $4.6 million, and this year’s will be about $3.5 million, he said.
Kilbride said about two-thirds of the organization’s previous sponsors have reaffirmed their support for this year’s events, which include one of the largest LGBTQ Pride marches in the world. As of Thursday, he said, one-third of the organization’s total partners had either pulled, scaled back or not yet finalized their funding commitments. As a result, NYC Pride is looking at a $350,000 dip in sponsorship funding, he said.
“A lot of it still is in the air at this point,” he said. “Folks are just moving a little bit more strategically and slowly than usual … and I think it’s a combination of the political environment, folks not sure what the repercussions would be, if any, but also the economy as well.”
Target is still sponsoring New York City’s annual LGBTQ Pride march, Kilbride said, though he noted the company has “chosen to take a silent partnership role,” and as a result is not listed as a sponsor on its website.
Target declined to comment on its decision not to sponsor WorldPride and on its partnership with NYC Pride.
Some brands face a ‘chilly environment’
Several Pride organizers — including those in Seattle, Boston and Minnesota’s Twin Cities — said they are being more selective about which sponsors they work with to ensure the companies’ policies align with their values.
Philadelphia Pride made the decision in 2022 not to work with corporations at all as a response to the community conversation about rainbow capitalism.
Twin Cities Pride, whichdraws about half a million people to its annual parade, announced earlier this year that it would not be partnering with Target as a sponsor for this year’s events after the Minneapolis-based retailer told employees in January that it would roll back DEI initiatives.
Andi Otto, the executive director of Twin Cities Pride, said he chose to turn down the company’s $50,000 sponsorship because he didn’t like the message it was sending to the LGBTQ community and communities of color. After Twin Cities Pride announced it wouldn’t partner with Target, Otto said, he launched a fundraiser that ended up doubling Target’s planned sponsorship.
Target declined to comment on Otto rejecting the company’s sponsorship.
Witeck said he’s not surprised that some brands are “facing a chilly environment” this year, as some Pride organizers and LGBTQ advocates question the values and consistency of some of their past sponsors.
“Community leaders have long opposed forms of ‘rainbow-washing’ if it’s felt the company has demonstrated weak or faltering loyalty,” he said, using a term similar to rainbow capitalism.
Pride celebrations ‘not going away’
Pride organizers have said the effects of losing major sponsors could vary widely, though none of the organizers who spoke with NBC News said they are scaling back security — and many, in fact, have said they’re increasing it.
NYC’s Kilbride said that as a result of having fewer committed sponsors and a reduced budget this year, three dance parties will not return for this year’s NYC Pride slate.
“We just have fewer options with a lower budget as far as what we can do, what kind of spaces we can provide for this community at a time that it’s obviously, in my opinion, more important than ever for these spaces to exist,” Kilbride said.
Otto said Twin Cities Pride, which typically spends about $800,000 on its annual Pride festival, is currently short about $200,000. In addition to declining Target’s donation, Otto said the organization had one big sponsor back out of negotiations and has not heard from several of its past sponsors yet. As a result, he said, this year’s festival will feature three stages for performances instead of its usual four.
The organizers of San Francisco Pride, which hosts a concert, parade and street fair the last weekend of June, usually start planning the three-day event nearly a year in advance, Ford said. As a result, she said, any potential funding shortage won’t affect this year’s events.
While many Pride organizers are making due with fewer corporate sponsors and lower budgets this year, Keller said the important thing to remember is Pride is “not going away.”
“You’re going to see even more people show up and need to find a safe space and find community and find where they can be their authentic selves, and that’s going to be at the Pride parade,” she said.
“We pulled all nonessential funding from the Department of Corrections in Maine, because they were allowing a man in a woman’s prison,” Bondi told Fox News.
Bondi did not provide an amount during the interview, but Fox News reported it would be $1.5 million.
The inmate Bondi was referring to is Andrea Balcer, who was sentenced to 40 years in prison in 2018 for the murder of her parents and family dog. Balcer’s attorney argued that she was going through a gender identity transformation and that her parents were not accepting. Balcer had no criminal record before the killings on Oct. 31, 2016, at her family home in Winthrop, Maine. She was 17 at the time.
Balcer is currently incarcerated at the Maine Correction Center’s Women’s Center, according to the Maine Department of Corrections’ online inmate database.
“We will pull your funding, we will protect women in prison, we will protect women in sports, we will protect women throughout this country,” Bondi said in the interview.
The Maine Department of Corrections released a statement Tuesday saying, in part, that it is “evaluating the impacts to services from these funding terminations.”
The department noted that the funding will affect three grant programs: Improving Substance Use Disorder Treatment and Recovery Outcomes for Adults in Reentry; Second Chance Act Addressing the Needs of Incarcerated Parents and Their Minor Children; and Smart Probation: Innovations in Supervision Initiative.
Advocacy groups criticized the move.
“If the federal government truly cares about women, all women, they would not withdraw funding for essential programs that lead to public safety in our communities,” Jan Collins, assistant director of the Maine Prisoner Advocacy Coalition, said Tuesday.
Maine has already been a target of an attempt to pull federal funding. The Department of Agriculture has paused federal funding for certain state educational programs over the state’s compliance with Title IX, the law that prohibits sex-based discrimination in education.
At issue is Maine’s allowing of a transgender athlete to participate in women’s sports. It comes after a public confrontation between Maine Gov. Janet Mills and President Donald Trump, which ended in Mills telling the president, “We’ll see you in court.” The federal government then launched an investigation into Maine’s policies, which found that Maine Department of Education, the Maine Principals’ Association and a high school in the state were in violation of Title IX.
Last week, the federal government issued a “final warning” to the state, saying it will send the case to the Justice Department if all parties do not sign an agreement by April 11.
Raiden Hung, of Jurassic Gymnastics in Boston, relaxes after competing on the uneven bars at the NAIGC national competition in Pittsburgh on Friday.Gene J. Puskar / AP
PITTSBURGH — Raiden Hung can’t imagine a life without gymnastics. And to be honest, he doesn’t want to.
There’s always been something about the sport that’s called to him. Something about flipping. Something about the discipline it requires. Something about the mixture of joy and calm he feels whenever he steps onto a mat.
“It keeps me sane, I guess,” the 21-year-old student at Northeastern University in Boston said. “Gymnastics is the love of my life basically.”
The hours in the gym have long served as a constant for Hung. The one thing he can always depend on. The one place where he can truly feel like himself.
Still, Hung feared he would be forced to give up gymnastics when he realized in his late teens that he was nonbinary. He had identified as female most of his life and competed in women’s events growing up. He says he now identifies as trans-masculine.
Part of Hung’s transition included beginning hormone replacement therapy, something he considered putting off over worries that it meant he would no longer be able to compete.
“It was sort of like, ‘Do I have to make a choice?’” Hung said. “And that would have probably been awful for my mental stability, like having to choose between the two.”
The National Association of Intercollegiate Gymnastics Clubs gave Hung safe harbor. The stated mission of the steadily growing organization that includes more than 2,500 athletes and 160 clubs across the country is to provide a place for college and adult gymnasts to continue competing while “pushing the boundaries of the sport.”
Ten Harder, of Boston University Gymnastics Club in Boston, dismounts the balance beam at the NAIGC national competition .Gene J. Puskar / AP
That includes, but is hardly limited to, being as gender-inclusive as possible.
During local NAIGC meets, for example, there are no gender categories. Athletes compete against every other athlete at their designated skill level, which can run from novice/developmental routines to ones that wouldn’t look out of place at an NCAA Division I meet.
Gymnasts can also hop on whatever apparatus they want. Women on parallel bars. Men on the balance beam. Just about anything goes. At its annual national meet, the NAIGC even offers the “decathlon,” which allows athletes of all gender identities to compete against each other across all 10 disciplines — six in men’s, four in women’s — of artistic gymnastics.
“(We want) people to be able to continue doing gymnastics into adulthood in a way that feels comfortable and safe and supportive for them,” said Ilana Shushanky, NAIGC’s director of operations.
A challenging climate
The approach comes as transgender athletes find themselves the target of increasingly heated rhetoric.
President Donald Trump signed an executive order in February that gave federal agencies wide latitude to ensure entities that receive federal funding abide by Title IX in alignment with the Trump administration’s view, which interprets “sex” as the gender someone was assigned at birth. A day later, the NCAA said it would limit competition in women’s sports to athletes who were assigned female at birth.
The message to the transgender community at large was clear: You do not belong here. Several trans and/or nonbinary members of the NAIGC, which is independently run and volunteer-led and does not rely on federal money to operate, felt it.
Multiple trans or nonbinary athletes who spoke to The Associated Press said they pondered quitting following last fall’s election, despondent over what at times feels like an increasingly hostile environment toward their community.
None did. One viewed stepping away as ceding power over a part of who they are to someone else. Another pointed to the social aspect of gymnastics and how vital the feeling of acceptance in their home gym was to maintaining proper mental and emotional health.
“Part of my identity is as an athlete and to see myself as strong and able to do hard things,” said Wes Weske, who is nonbinary and previously competed in the decathlon before recently graduating from medical school. “I think (gymnastics) really helped my self-image and was just an important part of understanding myself.”
A sense of normalcy
That sense of belonging was everywhere at the NAIGC’s national competition in early April. For three days, more than 1,700 athletes, including a dozen who registered their gender as “other,” turned a convention center hall in downtown Pittsburgh into what could best be described as a celebration.
Not just of gymnastics. But of diversity. And inclusion. It all looked and felt and sounded like any other large-scale meet. Cheers from one corner following a stuck dismount. Roars from another corner encouraging a competitor to hop back up after a fall.
Raiden Hung, of Jurassic Gymnastics in Boston, center left, celebrates with teammate Fay Malay after competing in the floor exercise.Gene J. Puskar / AP
For Hung and the 11 “other” competitors allowed to choose whether to compete in the men’s or women’s divisions, nationals provided the opportunity to salute the judges and stand alongside their teammates while being seen for who they really are.
When Hung dismounted from his uneven bars routine, several members of Jurassic Gymnastics, the all-adult competitive team based in Boston that Hung joined, came over to offer a hug, pep talk or both.
The group included Eric Petersen, a 49-year-old married father of two teenagers who competed on the men’s team at the Air Force Academy 30 years ago. He now dabbles in women’s artistic gymnastics alongside Hung at Jurassic.
“Certain people want to convince people that this is a big issue and people are losing their (minds),” Petersen said. “But it’s not like that. Other groups can be uptight about that if they want. But in this group, it’s about the love of the sport. If you love the sport, then do the sport and have fun, no matter who you are.”
Finding their way
Ten Harder got into gymnastics after being inspired by watching Gabby Douglas win gold at the 2012 Olympics. They spent their childhood competing as a woman but became increasingly uncomfortable at meets as they grew older.
Ten Harder, of Boston University Gymnastics Club in Boston, waits to compete on the balance beam.Gene J. Puskar / AP
Harder, 22, now a Ph. D. student at Boston University who identifies as nonbinary/trans masculine, felt like they had to make their own path. They connected on TikTok with a nonbinary gymnast from the Netherlands and started competing in a uniform that felt more natural, a practice leotard similar to a tank top and shorts. Over the last couple of years, they have run across other nonbinary or queer athletes, easing their sense of loneliness.
While there are times Harder admits they still grapple with feeling self-conscious about their gender identity even around teammates who have become friends and allies, there is also something greater at play.
“I think it’s important to remember that trans athletes are just people, too,” he said. “We deserve to be in the sports that we love. And we deserve to get a chance to compete and do everything just as other people do.”
A Florida school district said it won’t renew the contract of a teacher who used a student’s preferred name, instead of legal name, without parental permission, in violation of state law.
Melissa Calhoun is a literature teacher at Satellite High School in the coastal city of Satellite Beach, Florida. According to her LinkedIn profile, she’s worked for the Brevard County Public Schools district for the past 12 years.
Unless the state intervenes, Calhoun, who did not immediately return requests for comment, could be one of the first educators to lose a job under Florida’s Parental Rights in Education law, or what critics call the “Don’t Say Gay” law.
Brevard County Public Schools conducted an investigation after receiving a complaint from a parentwho said Calhoun had used a name other than their child’s legal name without the parent’s permission, according to a statement shared by Janet R. Murnaghan, a spokesperson for the district.
“This directly violates state law and the district’s standardized process for written parental consent,” the statement said. “Based on the teacher’s own admission that she knowingly did not comply with state statute she received a letter of reprimand. Teachers, like all employees, are expected to follow the law.”
Satellite High School in Brevard County, Fla.Google Maps
Since the state will be reviewing Calhoun’s teacher certificate based on the complaint, the district said it will not renew her annual contract, which expires in May, until the issue is resolved.
“We’re here to really show support for Ms. Calhoun and to show that we are not OK with what is going on,” sophomore Brianna Knight told WESH. “We truly are upset that we are losing such a positive teacher.”
Calhoun’s supporters also started a petition asking the Brevard County School Board to reinstate her. As of Friday afternoon, it had garnered more than 22,000 signatures.
Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis signed the Parental Rights in Education law in March 2022. At that time, it prohibited “classroom instruction by school personnel or third parties on sexual orientation or gender identity” in kindergarten through third grade “or in a manner that is not age-appropriate or developmentally appropriate for students in accordance with state standards.”
A year later, he signed an expanded version of the measure that prohibits sexual orientation or gender identity instruction in prekindergarten through eighth grade, restricts reproductive health education in sixth through 12th grade, and bars schools from requiring students or employees to refer to each other with pronouns that do not align with their assigned sex at birth. It also prohibits transgender school employees from sharing their pronouns with students, among other restrictions.
In July 2023, a few months after DeSantis signed the expanded measure, the Florida Board of Education passed new rules to ensure schools were following the law and to “strengthen and enhance the safety and welfare of students in K-12 public schools and protect parental rights.”
Among those rules was a requirement that school districts receive parental permission before staffers can call a student by anything other than their legal name, including a nickname, even at the student’s request.
At a school board meeting this week, several parents spoke both in favor of and against the district’s decision not to renew Calhoun’s contract.
“There was no harm, no threat to safety, no malicious intent,” one parent of a student in the district who also said she was one of Calhoun’s colleagues said during the meeting, WESH reported. “Just a teacher trying to connect with a student, and for that, her contract was not renewed despite her strong dedication and years of service. I ask you, how can we justify this?”
School board member Katye Campbell said during the meeting that people might think the rule is “silly,” but that it’s important.
“The parents are the number one decision-makers for their children,” Campbell said, The Washington Post reported. In response to a question about students’ rights, she said the district shouldn’t interfere in families’ decisions “unless we legally have a reason to.”
