San Antonio elects its 1st Asian American woman, openly gay mayor
Gina Ortiz Jones defeated Rolando Pablos to become the mayor of San Antonio, Texas, making history as the city's first Asian American woman, first Filipino woman and first openly gay mayor.
By the numbers: Jones won 54% of the vote in the runoff election, receiving 77,484 votes to Pablos' 65,202. Aside from the aforementioned milestones, she is now the first Asian American woman to helm a major Texas city and the first woman mayor in Texas to have served in war.
About Jones: Jones, a 44-year-old West Side native, was born to a Filipino mother who immigrated from the Philippine province of Pangasinan and raised her and her sister alone. Jones left San Antonio in 1999 after receiving an Air Force ROTC scholarship to attend Boston University. She served as an intelligence officer in Iraq and later managed a $173 billion budget and 600,000 personnel as undersecretary of the Air Force in the Biden administration. She lost congressional races in Texas' 23rd Congressional District in 2018 and 2020 before winning this mayoral contest.
What she's saying: In her victory speech Saturday night, Jones thanked her supporters and reminded the crowd that San Antonio 'is about compassion' and 'leading with everybody in mind.' She also stressed that her victory is 'a testament to the vision we put forward — a vision of getting things done while treating people with dignity, respect and compassion.' She also said she looks forward to being 'a mayor for all.'
Trending on NextShark:
Jones faces immediate challenges including projected multi-million dollar budget deficits when she takes office.
This story is part of The Rebel Yellow Newsletter — a bold weekly newsletter from the creators of NextShark, reclaiming our stories and celebrating Asian American voices.
Trending on NextShark:
Subscribe free to join the movement. If you love what we're building, consider becoming a paid member — your support helps us grow our team, investigate impactful stories, and uplift our community.
Subscribe here now!
Trending on NextShark:
Download the NextShark App:
Want to keep up to date on Asian American News? Download the NextShark App today!
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
3 hours ago
- The Hill
Australian and Philippine forces launch largest military exercises near disputed South China Sea
MANILA, Philippines (AP) — Australia on Friday launched its largest military exercises with Philippine forces, involving more than 3,600 military personnel in live-fire drills, battle maneuvers and a beach assault at a Philippine town on the disputed South China Sea, where the allies have raised alarm over Beijing's assertive actions. The exercises are called Alon, meaning wave in the Philippine language Tagalog, and will showcase Australia's firepower. The drills will involve a guided-missile navy destroyer, F/A-18 supersonic fighter jets, a C-130 troop and cargo aircraft, Javelin anti-tank weapons and special forces sniper weapons. Military officials said defense forces from the United States, Canada, Japan, South Korea, New Zealand and Indonesia will join as observers. 'This exercise reflects Australia's commitment to working with partners to ensure we maintain a region where state sovereignty is protected, international law is followed and nations can make decisions free from coercion,' Vice Admiral Justin Jones of the Royal Australian Navy said in a statement. The combat exercises are 'an opportunity for us to practice how we collaborate and respond to shared security challenges and project force over great distances in the Indo-Pacific,' Jones said. The exercises will run until Aug. 29. Australia is the second country after the U.S. with a visiting forces agreement with the Philippines, allowing the deployment of large numbers of troops for combat exercises in each other's territory. The Philippines has signed a similar pact with Japan, which will take effect next month. It is in talks with several other Asian and Western countries including France and Canada for similar defense accords. China has deplored multinational war drills and alliances in or near the disputed South China Sea, saying the U.S. and its allies are 'ganging up' against it and militarizing the region. China claims most of the South China Sea, a busy global trade route, where it has had a spike of territorial faceoffs with the Philippines in recent years. Vietnam, Malaysia, Brunei and Taiwan also lay claims to the resource-rich waters. On Monday, a Chinese navy ship collided with a Chinese coast guard ship while trying to drive away a smaller Philippine coast guard vessel in the Scarborough Shoal in the South China Sea. The Australian Embassy in Manila expressed concern over 'the dangerous and unprofessional conduct of Chinese vessels near Scarborough Shoal involving the Philippine Coast Guard' and said the incident 'highlights the need for de-escalation, restraint and respect for international law.' In response, the U.S. deployed two warships off the Scarborough on Wednesday in what it called a freedom of navigation operation to protest China's expansive claims, restrictions and its demand for entry notifications in the disputed waters. In February, a Chinese J-16 fighter jet released flares that passed within 30 meters (100 feet) of an Australian P-8 Poseidon military surveillance plane in daylight and in international air space, Australian defense officials said at the time.
8 hours ago
Judge strikes down Trump administration guidance against diversity programs
WASHINGTON -- A federal judge on Thursday struck down two Trump administration actions aimed at eliminating diversity, equity and inclusion programs at the nation's schools and universities. In her ruling, U.S. District Judge Stephanie Gallagher in Maryland found that the Education Department violated the law when it threatened to cut federal funding from educational institutions that continued with DEI initiatives. The guidance has been on hold since April when three federal judges blocked various portions of the Education Department's anti-DEI measures. The ruling Thursday followed a motion for summary judgment from the American Federation of Teachers and the American Sociological Association, which challenged the government's actions in a February lawsuit. The case centers on two Education Department memos ordering schools and universities to end all 'race-based decision-making' or face penalties up to a total loss of federal funding. It's part of a campaign to end practices the Trump administration frames as discrimination against white and Asian American students. The new ruling orders the department to scrap the guidance because it runs afoul of procedural requirements, though Gallagher wrote that she took no view on whether the policies were 'good or bad, prudent or foolish, fair or unfair.' Gallagher, who was appointed by President Donald Trump, rejected the government's argument that the memos simply served to remind schools that discrimination is illegal. 'It initiated a sea change in how the Department of Education regulates educational practices and classroom conduct, causing millions of educators to reasonably fear that their lawful, and even beneficial, speech might cause them or their schools to be punished,' Gallagher wrote. Democracy Forward, a legal advocacy firm representing the plaintiffs, called it an important victory over the administration's attack on DEI. 'Threatening teachers and sowing chaos in schools throughout America is part of the administration's war on education, and today the people won,' said Skye Perryman, the group's president and CEO. A statement from the Education Department on Thursday said it was disappointed in the ruling but that 'judicial action enjoining or setting aside this guidance has not stopped our ability to enforce Title VI protections for students at an unprecedented level.' The conflict started with a Feb. 14 memo declaring that any consideration of race in admissions, financial aid, hiring or other aspects of academic and student life would be considered a violation of federal civil rights law. The memo dramatically expanded the government's interpretation of a 2023 Supreme Court decision barring colleges from considering race in admissions decisions. The government argued the ruling applied not only to admissions but across all of education, forbidding 'race-based preferences' of any kind. 'Educational institutions have toxically indoctrinated students with the false premise that the United States is built upon 'systemic and structural racism' and advanced discriminatory policies and practices,' wrote Craig Trainor, the acting assistant secretary of the department's Office for Civil Rights. A further memo in April asked state education agencies to certify they were not using 'illegal DEI practices.' Violators risked losing federal money and being prosecuted under the False Claims Act, it said. In total, the guidance amounted to a full-scale reframing of the government's approach to civil rights in education. It took aim at policies that were created to address longstanding racial disparities, saying those practices were their own form of discrimination. The memos drew a wave of backlash from states and education groups that called it illegal government censorship. In its lawsuit, the American Federation of Teachers said the government was imposing 'unclear and highly subjective' limits on schools across the country. It said teachers and professors had to 'choose between chilling their constitutionally protected speech and association or risk losing federal funds and being subject to prosecution.' standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at
Los Angeles Times
16 hours ago
- Los Angeles Times
Judge strikes down Trump guidance against diversity programs at schools and colleges
WASHINGTON — A federal judge on Thursday struck down two Trump administration actions aimed at eliminating diversity, equity and inclusion programs at the nation's schools and universities. In her ruling, U.S. District Judge Stephanie Gallagher in Maryland found that the Education Department violated the law when it threatened to cut federal funding from educational institutions that continued with DEI initiatives. The guidance has been on hold since April when three federal judges blocked various portions of the Education Department's anti-DEI measures. The ruling Thursday followed a motion for summary judgment from the American Federation of Teachers and the American Sociological Association, which challenged the government's actions in a February lawsuit. The case centers on two Education Department memos ordering schools and universities to end all 'race-based decision-making' or face penalties up to a total loss of federal funding. It's part of a campaign to end practices the Trump administration frames as discrimination against white and Asian American students. The new ruling orders the department to scrap the guidance because it runs afoul of procedural requirements, though Gallagher wrote that she took no view on whether the policies were 'good or bad, prudent or foolish, fair or unfair.' Gallagher, who was appointed by President Trump, rejected the government's argument that the memos simply served to remind schools that discrimination is illegal. 'It initiated a sea change in how the Department of Education regulates educational practices and classroom conduct, causing millions of educators to reasonably fear that their lawful, and even beneficial, speech might cause them or their schools to be punished,' Gallagher wrote. Democracy Forward, a legal advocacy firm representing the plaintiffs, called it an important victory over the administration's attack on DEI. 'Threatening teachers and sowing chaos in schools throughout America is part of the administration's war on education, and today the people won,' said Skye Perryman, the group's president and CEO. The Education Department did not immediately comment on Thursday. The conflict started with a Feb. 14 memo declaring that any consideration of race in admissions, financial aid, hiring or other aspects of academic and student life would be considered a violation of federal civil rights law. The memo dramatically expanded the government's interpretation of a 2023 Supreme Court decision barring colleges from considering race in admissions decisions. The government argued the ruling applied not only to admissions but across all of education, forbidding 'race-based preferences' of any kind. 'Educational institutions have toxically indoctrinated students with the false premise that the United States is built upon 'systemic and structural racism' and advanced discriminatory policies and practices,' wrote Craig Trainor, the acting assistant secretary of the department's Office for Civil Rights. A further memo in April asked state education agencies to certify they were not using 'illegal DEI practices.' Violators risked losing federal money and being prosecuted under the False Claims Act, it said. In total, the guidance amounted to a full-scale reframing of the government's approach to civil rights in education. It took aim at policies that were created to address longstanding racial disparities, saying those practices were their own form of discrimination. The memos drew a wave of backlash from states and education groups that called it illegal government censorship. In its lawsuit, the American Federation of Teachers said the government was imposing 'unclear and highly subjective' limits on schools across the country. It said teachers and professors had to 'choose between chilling their constitutionally protected speech and association or risk losing federal funds and being subject to prosecution.' Binkley writes for the Associated Press.
