logo
The Trump administration's "divide and conquer" approach to LGBTQ rights

The Trump administration's "divide and conquer" approach to LGBTQ rights

Yahoo5 hours ago

In Marsha P. Johnson's final interview before her death in 1992, the activist later recognized as an icon of the movement that preceded LGBTQ rights in the United States explained why she, a transgender woman, championed a cause that often excluded her.
"I've been walking for gay rights all these years," Johnson said, referencing early Pride marches in a conversation that appears in a 2012 documentary about her life. "Because you never completely have your rights, one person, until you all have your rights."
Since then, social and political wins over time grew to encompass everyone represented by the acronym LGBTQ, which stands for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer. But that's become less true in recent years, as lawmakers in Tennessee, Texas and a number of other states repeatedly pushed legislation to restrict access to gender-affirming care, bathrooms and sports teams for transgender people.
Anti-trans sentiment was central to President Trump's 2024 campaign, LGBTQ advocates say, and it followed him into office. Many of his directives this term have closely mirrored Project 2025, a conservative policy agenda that explicitly prioritizes eroding LGBTQ rights.
A "divide and conquer" approach
From health care bans, to sports bans, bathroom bans, a military ban and attempts to erase non-binary gender pronouns from the federal system, Mr. Trump's most conspicuous threats to LGBTQ rights specifically target trans people, a pattern that has drawn accusations of scapegoating from his critics, given that trans people make up an estimated 1% or less of the U.S. population.
LGBTQ advocates also see it as a tactic to sow division in the community.
"Donald Trump ran for president on an age-old platform of divide and conquer," said Brandon Wolf, the national press secretary at the Human Rights Campaign, an LGBTQ advocacy organization. "Inside the LGBTQ+ community, Donald Trump ran his campaign saying, I'm not targeting all LGBTQ+ people, just the trans people, and if you sacrifice that community, perhaps you will be spared."
While polling data showed most LGBTQ voters didn't choose to elect him, Mr. Trump has gained increasingly loud support from a faction of gay conservatives who disavow the "radical LGBT left" and insist his policies aren't at odds with their personal freedoms.
When the federal Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration announced the upcoming termination of part of its 988 Suicide and Crisis Lifeline dedicated to helping LGBTQ youth, the gay conservative group Log Cabin Republicans called related media coverage "fake news."
On TikTok, a small but popular band of conservative gay influencers post videos to similarly defend Mr. Trump's record. "Rights I've lost in Trump's America as a gay man," reads the caption of one of them, followed by an empty list numbered 1 through 5. In the comments section of another, a TikTok user responded to a thread outlining the current administration's anti-LGBTQ actions by saying, "None of that has anything to do with us being gay."
Trump's orders
On Inauguration Day, Mr. Trump declared in his televised address to the American public that "only two genders," male and female, would be recognized going forward by the federal government. He signed an executive order to enforce that within hours of being sworn in.
Titled "Defending Women From Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government," the wide-ranging order included instructions for the State Department to prohibit trans people from using gender markers that reflect their identities on official documents, like passports, and instead require that those markers align with the document holders' reproductive organs "at conception."
"The Trump administration's passport policy attacks the foundations of the right to privacy and the freedom for all people to live their lives safely and with dignity," said Jessie Rossman, the legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union in Massachusetts, which has made headway in a lawsuit aiming to reverse the new rule, in a statement. "We will continue to fight to stop this unlawful policy once and for all."
Like many of Mr. Trump's executive orders, that one has faced steep challenges in the courts, and legal experts say its long-term applicability is uncertain as some elements contradict the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Bostock v. Clayton County, which codified discrimination protections for all LGBTQ employees under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. The same conflict exists in Mr. Trump's orders to eliminate diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives, in which he instructed federal departments to "correct" what he called a "misapplication" of the Bostock ruling in their policies.
Their uncertain futures aside, LGBTQ advocacy and rights groups feel those policies and others have already reaped consequences on the community at large — "the predictable result," said Wolf, "of a divide and conquer campaign."
In response to Mr. Trump's directive to end "radical indoctrination in K-12 schools," the Department of Defense banned books with themes involving gender identity, sexual orientation and race from its schools for children in military families, which receive federal funding, according to a separate lawsuit filed by the ACLU. A textbook focused on LGBTQ figures in American history was tossed out under the ban.
Meanwhile, corporations scrambling to comply with anti-DEI orders eliminated or scaled back their partnerships with Pride celebrations around the country after Mr. Trump's takeover of the Kennedy Center in February forced WorldPride organizers to regroup because events were either canceled or relocated from the venue. And, in May, the Human Rights Campaign issued a memo warning that Mr. Trump's "big, beautiful bill," a "skinny" budget proposal for the upcoming fiscal year, would cut $2.67 billion in federal funding from programs that support LGBTQ people.
Among its most urgent concerns were the administration's plans to significantly downsize public health programs for HIV/AIDS prevention as well as Justice Department programs that investigate anti-LGBTQ hate crimes, in addition to sweeping cuts to resources for the trans community.
Asked where LGBTQ rights stand under the Trump administration, a White House spokesperson pointed to Mr. Trump's past appointments of openly gay judges and officials such as Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, in addition to two initiatives during his first term to decriminalize homosexuality globally and end the HIV epidemic by 2030, although his 2026 budget proposal would hamper that.
"President Trump's historic reelection and the overall MAGA movement is a big tent welcome for all and home to a large swath of the American people," said the spokesperson, Harrison Fields, in a statement. "The President continues to foster a national pride that should be celebrated daily, and he is honored to serve all Americans. The American people voted for a return to common sense, and the President is delivering on every campaign promise supported by 77 million voters and is ushering in our Golden Age."
"An anti-LGBTQ administration"
In addition to tangible policies, advocates say that attitudes toward LGBTQ people from the nation's highest office are contributing to higher incidences of violence against LGBTQ people and likely foreshadow harms still to come.
"Overall, it is clearly an anti-LGBTQ administration," said Sarah-Kate Ellis, the president and chief operating officer at the LGBTQ media organization GLAAD. "And I think that they are consistently signaling that they want to roll back all of our hard-won rights."
Mr. Trump and those in his orbit have repeatedly cast LGBTQ people and activities in a negative light. While announcing leadership shifts at the Kennedy Center in February, the president penned a social media post that pledged, in capital letters, to ensure the arts forum would no longer host drag shows "or other anti-American propaganda." His press secretary, Karoline Leavitt, later said the country needs "less LGBTQ graduate majors" in an interview on Fox News criticizing Harvard University.
According to advocates and academics, the administration frequently relies on political strategies to marginalize trans people that have been used against other groups in the past. The term "groomers," for example, is a historically anti-gay trope, and "gender ideology" originally demonized feminism.
There were also notable moments of silence from the Trump administration, which did not acknowledge Pride Month, even as a global Pride festival took place for several weeks between May and June in Washington, D.C. LGBTQ people say that wasn't necessarily a surprise after watching their visibility decline in national forums this year, starting with mentions of "lesbian," "bisexual," "gay," "transgender," "sexual orientation" and "gender identity" being scrubbed from the White House website the day after Mr. Trump's inauguration, in a flashback to his first term.
References to trans people disappeared around the same time from the website for the Stonewall National Monument, considered the birthplace of gay liberation, in a move that sparked particular outcry. Marcia P. Johnson was among the pioneering trans activists who remain named on the site despite that change.
Where do LGBTQ rights stand in America?
Advocates for LGBTQ rights and others in the community say they're wary of what may come next. Echoing discourse that has persisted online since Mr. Trump's campaign, Ellis said she expects a right-wing push to overturn Obergefell v. Hodges, the landmark Supreme Court decision that legalized same-sex marriage, is imminent.
"Our view on this is that they will continually attack our community and find any way to dismantle our community," she said, of the right-wing forces propelling Mr. Trump. "They've only focused on trans people because they are such a small population and so marginalized. But they will go after our marriages. They will go after our families. It has always been the anti-LGBTQ movement at the center of this."
At least nine state legislatures have introduced bills to reverse the Supreme Court's gay marriage ruling since Mr. Trump returned to Washington. Earlier this month, the Southern Baptist Convention voted overwhelmingly to pass a resolution that calls for the same. LGBTQ advocates emphasize that marriage equality is settled law, and research from Gallup and GLAAD demonstrate that a vast majority of Americans continue to support it. But some still worry the path to overturning Obergefell could be akin to the one that led to the fall of Roe v. Wade, which kept abortion legal for 50 years before Trump-appointed justices tipped the Supreme Court bench and struck it down.
Breaking down major Supreme Court ruling on nationwide injunctions
Saturday Sessions: Gordi performs "Lunch at Dune"
Jeff Bezos and Lauren Sánchez set for star-studded wedding in Venice

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Democrats split on presidential primary candidate, poll says
Democrats split on presidential primary candidate, poll says

Yahoo

time18 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Democrats split on presidential primary candidate, poll says

LANSING, Mich. (WLNS) — A new Emerson College Polling of U.S. voters shows that Democrats are split on who they will support in the 2028 presidential primary. According to the poll, 16% support former Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg, 13% former Vice President Kamala Harris, 12% California Gov. Gavin Newsom, 7% Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro, and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, respectively, 5% Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, and 3% New Jersey Senator Cory Booker. 23% percent of voters are undecided. Emerson College reports that in the last poll, held in , Harris received 37% support, Gov. Newsom 7%, and Sec. Buttigieg 4%, Gov. Shapiro 3%, and Gov. Whitmer 3%. In the November poll, voters were allowed to write in their preferred candidate. On a generic 2028 presidential ballot test, 42% would support the generic Democratic candidate, 42% the Republican, and 16% are undecided. 'Similarly to the generic congressional ballot, independents break for the generic Democrat on the presidential ballot, 37% to 29%, with a significant 34% undecided,' said Spencer Kimball, executive director of Emerson College Polling, in a news release sent to 6 News. According to the poll, the economy remains the top issue for voters at 32%, down from 41% in March. Threats to democracy are the top concern for 22% of voters, a four-point increase. Immigration follows at 14%, healthcare at 9%, housing affordability at 7%, and crime at 5%. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Trump golfs with Republican senators Schmitt, Graham and Paul ahead of 'Big, Beautiful Bill' vote
Trump golfs with Republican senators Schmitt, Graham and Paul ahead of 'Big, Beautiful Bill' vote

Fox News

time19 minutes ago

  • Fox News

Trump golfs with Republican senators Schmitt, Graham and Paul ahead of 'Big, Beautiful Bill' vote

President Donald Trump played a round of golf with Republican leaders on Saturday. The president was joined by Sen. Eric Schmitt, R-Mo., Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-SC., Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., and CIA Director John Ratcliffe, sources confirmed to Fox News. The outing comes as Republican senators look to pass the "Big Beautiful Bill" by Saturday afternoon. The bill has a self-imposed deadline of July 4. In a memo sent on Saturday to Senate offices, the White House endorsed the latest revisions to the bill and called for its passage, while warning that failure to approve the budget "would be the ultimate betrayal". Graham shared the golf outing in a post on social media, expressing optimism over the bill's vote. Graham revealed the stitched-together text of the colossal bill late Friday night. Republican leaders, the White House and disparate factions within the Senate and House GOP have been meeting to find middle ground on other pain points, such as tweaking the caps on state and local tax (SALT) deductions. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent hammered on the importance of passing Trump's bill on time. He met with Senate Republicans during their closed-door lunch and spread the message that advancing the colossal tax package would go a long way toward giving businesses more certainty in the wake of the president's tariffs. "We need certainty," he said. "With so much uncertainty, and having the bill on the president's desk by July 4 will give us great tax certainty, and I believe, accelerate the economy in the third quarter of the year." Follow Fox News Digital's sports coverage on X, and subscribe to the Fox News Sports Huddle newsletter.

Senate Republicans revise Trump's policy bill, scrounging for votes to pass it
Senate Republicans revise Trump's policy bill, scrounging for votes to pass it

Boston Globe

time20 minutes ago

  • Boston Globe

Senate Republicans revise Trump's policy bill, scrounging for votes to pass it

Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up Republican leaders in the Senate are rushing to shore up support for the legislation so they can quickly pass it and send it to the House for final approval in time to meet the July 4 deadline Trump has set. An initial vote in the Senate could come later Saturday. Advertisement Party leaders are trying to appease two flanks of their conference. Some, including Sen. Thom Tillis of North Carolina, said they could not support it without greater reassurances that the Medicaid cuts it contains would not hurt rural hospitals in their states. And fiscal hawks, including Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky, have said they do not want to back legislation that would only increase the deficit. Advertisement The core of the bill remains the same. It would extend tax cuts passed by Republicans in 2017 and add some new ones Trump campaigned on, while slashing spending on safety-net programs, including Medicaid and food assistance. The biggest tax cuts and the biggest changes to those anti-poverty programs remained intact. Taken together, the bill would likely increase federal debt by more than $3 trillion over the next decade, though lawmakers are still shaping the bill and waiting on an official estimate from the Congressional Budget Office. With Trump demanding quick action, Republicans in Congress have intensified their efforts to push it through to enactment even as many of them — including several who voted for it in the House — have been open about their reservations about a measure they are concerned could be a political loser. The revisions released early Saturday were designed to allay some of those concerns. Senators, including Tillis and Susan Collins, R-Maine, had pressed for the inclusion of a rural hospital fund to help health care providers absorb the impact of a provision that would crack down on strategies that many states have developed to finance their Medicaid programs. Despite their pushback, that provider tax change remains in the bill, though lawmakers have delayed its implementation by one year. It is unclear whether a $25 billion compensation fund will be enough to win their votes. Collins had suggested that she wanted to provide as much as $100 billion to ensure that rural hospitals, which operate on thin margins, were not adversely affected. Advertisement But it appeared to be enough to win over at least one Republican holdout who had expressed concern about the Medicaid cuts — Sen. Josh Hawley of Missouri, who said he would vote for the bill and was confident that changes benefit his state at least in the short term. A new provision allowing 'individuals in a noncontiguous state' to be exempt from enforcing new work requirements imposed on SNAP, formerly known as food stamps, appeared aimed at mollifying Murkowski of Alaska. Her state would be hit with billions of dollars in nutrition assistance costs as a result of the legislation, and she had cited the provision as one of her chief concerns. The bill also includes new health provisions designed to benefit Alaska, as well as new tax benefits for fishers in the state's waters. Some of the changes were aimed at appealing to members of the House, where Republicans from high-tax states like New York have threatened to sink the bill if it does not include a substantial increase in the state and local tax deduction, currently capped at $10,000. Senate Republicans, skeptical of the deduction, still ultimately decided to match the House plan to lift the cap to $40,000. But while the House made the increase permanent, the Senate keeps it for only five years, allowing it to snap back to $10,000 in 2030. The newest draft makes even sharper cuts to subsidies for wind and solar power, something that Trump and other conservatives had explicitly called for this past week. It remains to be seen whether those changes could cause friction with Republicans who have publicly supported green energy credits, including Tillis, Murkowski and Sen. John Curtis of Utah. Advertisement Previously, the Senate proposed allowing companies that were building wind and solar farms to claim a tax credit worth at least 30% of their costs if they started construction this year, with a phaseout over two years. But the revised bill would require companies place their projects 'in service' by the end of 2027 to claim the tax break. The bill would also impose additional taxes on renewable energy projects that receive 'material assistance' from China, even if they don't qualify for the credit. Because China dominates global supply chains, those new fees could affect a large number of projects. The new Senate measure would more quickly end tax credits for electric vehicles, doing away with them by Sept. 30. It would also slow the phaseout of a lucrative tax credit to make hydrogen fuels, allowing such projects to qualify if construction were started by the end of 2027, instead of by the end of this year. The bill also includes a provision written by Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, to sell as much as 1.225 million acres of federal land across the American West in order to build housing. Earlier versions of that proposal that would have auctioned off even more acreage had drawn fierce opposition from conservative hunters and outdoorsmen, and Republican senators from Montana and Idaho had said they would not vote for it. This article originally appeared in

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store