NYC, San Francisco and other U.S. cities cap Pride Month with a mix of party and protest
The monthlong celebration of LGBTQ Pride reached its rainbow-laden crescendo Sunday as huge crowds took part in jubilant, daylong street parties from New York to San Francisco.
Pride celebrations typically weave politics and protest together with colorful pageantry, but this year's iterations took a decidedly more defiant stance as Republicans, led by President Donald Trump, have sought to roll back LGBTQ friendly policies.
The theme of the festivities in Manhattan was, appropriately, "Rise Up: Pride in Protest." San Francisco's Pride theme was "Queer Joy is Resistance," while Seattle was simply "Louder."
Lance Brammer, a 56-year-old teacher from Ohio attending his first Pride parade in New York, said he felt "validated" as he marveled at the sheer size of the city's celebration, the nation's oldest and largest.
"With the climate that we have politically, it just seems like they're trying to do away with the whole LGBTQ community, especially the trans community," he said wearing a vivid, multicolored shirt. "And it just shows that they've got a fight ahead of them if they think that they're going to do that with all of these people here and all of the support."
In San Francisco, Xander Briere said the LGBTQ+ community is fighting for its very survival in the face of sustained attacks and changing public sentiment, particularly against transgender people.
"We're slowly rolling back the clock, and it's unfortunate and it's scary," the program specialist at the San Francisco Community Health Center said. "It feels like the world hates us right now, but this is a beautiful community celebration of resistance, of history to show the world that we are here and we are not going anywhere."
Manhattan's parade wound its way down Fifth Avenue with more than 700 participating groups greeted by huge crowds.
The rolling celebration passed the Stonewall Inn, a Greenwich Village gay bar where a 1969 police raid triggered protests and fired up the LGBTQ+ rights movement. The first pride march, held in New York City in 1970, commemorated the one-year anniversary of the Stonewall uprising. The site is now a national monument.
Meanwhile, marchers in San Francisco, host to another of the world's largest Pride events, headed down the California city's central Market Street to concert stages set up at the Civic Center Plaza. Denver, Chicago, Seattle, Minneapolis and Toronto, Canada, were among the other major North American cities that hosted Pride parades Sunday.
Several global cities including Tokyo, Paris and Sao Paulo, held their events earlier this month while others come later in the year, including London in July and Rio de Janeiro in November.
Since taking office in January, Trump has taken specific aim at transgender people, removing them from the military, preventing federal insurance programs from paying for gender-affirming surgeries for young people and attempting to keep transgender athletes out of girls and women's sports.
"We have to be visible. We have to come together. We have to fight. Our existence is trying to be erased," said Jahnel Butler, one of the community grand marshals at the San Francisco parade.
Peter McLaughlin said he's lived in New York for years but has never attended the Pride parade. The 34-year-old Brooklyn resident said he felt compelled this year as a transgender man.
"A lot of people just don't understand that letting people live doesn't take away from their own experience, and right now it's just important to show that we're just people," McLaughlin said.
Gabrielle Meighan, 23, of New Jersey, said she felt it was important to come out to this year's celebrations because they come days after the tenth anniversary of the Supreme Court's landmark June 26, 2015, ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges that recognized same-sex marriage nationwide.
Manhattan also hosted on Sunday the Queer Liberation March, an activism-centered event launched in recent years amid concerns that the more mainstream parade had become too corporate.
Marchers holding signs that included "Gender affirming care saves lives" and "No Pride in apartheid" headed north from the city's AIDS Memorial to Columbus Circle near Central Park.
Among the other headwinds faced by gay rights groups this year is the loss of corporate sponsorship.
American companies have pulled back support of Pride events, reflecting a broader walking back of diversity and inclusion efforts amid shifting public sentiment.
NYC Pride said earlier this month that about 20% of its corporate sponsors dropped or reduced support, including PepsiCo and Nissan. Organizers of San Francisco Pride said they lost the support of five major corporate donors, including Comcast and Anheuser-Busch.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
NBC News
14 minutes ago
- NBC News
The Senate races toward a 'big, beautiful' finish line: From the Politics Desk
Welcome to the online version of From the Politics Desk, an evening newsletter that brings you the NBC News Politics team's latest reporting and analysis from the White House, Capitol Hill and the campaign trail. In today's edition, our intrepid team on Capitol Hill has the latest state of play as the Senate inches closer to a final vote on President Donald Trump's 'big, beautiful bill.' Plus, we take a detour to the campaign trail, where two Republicans who were staring down tough re-election races opted for retirement instead. — Adam Wollner Senate begins voting on Trump's massive bill as Republicans race toward the finish line By Sahil Kapur, Scott Wong and Frank Thorp V The Senate began voting on amendments to President Donald Trump's massive tax cut and spending bill with the goal of passing it this evening or early tomorrow morning, even with the support of several key Republicans up in the air. The 940-page legislation, which the Senate advanced on a 51-49 vote late Saturday, was still taking shape even as the 'vote-a-rama' began — a process in which senators can offer an unlimited number of amendments — with GOP leaders hoping to use it to satisfy concerns from wavering factions. The math: Republicans need to hold 50 of their 53 senators to pass the bill. They have lost Sens. Rand Paul of Kentucky, who complained that it adds too much to the national debt, and Thom Tillis of North Carolina, who blasted the Medicaid cuts as damaging to his home state. (More on Tillis below.) Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, voted to advance the bill on Saturday but told NBC News she was still leaning against it on final passage. She expressed worries about the Medicaid cuts and said she prefers raising taxes on high earners, calling those 'two of the most important things' she wants addressed. And Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, who also voted to keep the process moving over the weekend after discussions with Republican leaders, has voiced Medicaid concerns. In addition, a group of conservatives — Sens. Ron Johnson, R-Wis.; Rick Scott, R-Fla.; and Mike Lee, R-Utah — are insisting on revising the bill to reduce the deficit impact. The cost: The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office projects that the Senate bill would increase the national debt by $3.3 trillion over the next 10 years — it found that revenues would fall by about $4.5 trillion and spending would be cut by $1.2 trillion. The bill is also projected to lead to 11.8 million people losing their health insurance by 2034 if it becomes law, the CBO said. The GOP is using a budget trick known as ' current policy baseline ' to hide the cost of extending the tax cuts Trump signed into law in 2017, effectively lowering the sticker price by $3.8 trillion. That tactic has not been used in the budget process before and would set a precedent to weaken the Senate's 60-vote rule. The Senate voted 53-47 to green-light the new baseline with all Republicans voting in favor. Julie Tsirkin and Frank Thorp V run through the major provisions in the 940-page Senate bill and how much they will cost or save the government. Shannon Pettypiece breaks down the winners and losers in the bill. Elon Musk has renewed his attacks on the legislation, threatening to support primary challenges to lawmakers who vote for it. The past few days have seen a flurry of activity on the 2026 campaign trail, with a handful of lawmakers plotting their exits from Washington. North Carolina Senate: Republican Sen. Thom Tillis made the surprise announcement Sunday that he would not seek re-election after voting against advancing the 'big, beautiful bill.' President Donald Trump had threatened to meet with potential primary challengers to the two-term senator in battleground North Carolina. Tillis' seat had already been a top target for Democrats heading into next year as they seek to cut into the GOP's 53-47 Senate majority. Nebraska's 2nd District: Rep. Don Bacon will not run for re-election, opening up his Omaha-based seat. It's one of three districts represented by a Republican that Kamala Harris carried in the 2024 election, making it a prime pick-up opportunity for Democrats. Bacon told The Wall Street Journal he's 'not a 'yes' necessarily' on the Trump agenda bill when it comes back to the House. South Dakota governor: We wrote earlier this year about the growing number of sitting members of Congress who are looking to move back home. Add GOP Rep. Dusty Johnson to the list after he launched his gubernatorial campaign. Pennsylvania's 3rd District: 71-year-old Rep. Dwight Evans, D-Pa., decided against seeking a sixth term in Congress. The deep-blue Philadelphia-area seat is expected to draw high interest from potential Democratic candidates. 🎙️ Here's the Scoop In this evening's episode of ' Here's the Scoop,' host Morgan Chesky discusses the Senate's marathon voting session on the 'big, beautiful bill' with NBC News chief congressional correspondent Ryan Nobles. Listen to the episode here →
The Independent
17 minutes ago
- The Independent
Trump and his ‘One Big, Beautiful Bill' just put the Senate in play for Democrats
On Sunday, Sen. Thom Tillis, a North Carolina Republican, announced that he would not seek re-election. This came after numerous threats from President Donald Trump because of Tillis' opposition to the so-called 'One Big, Beautiful' bill. Trump had even floated the idea of endorsing a primary challenger against Tillis. But when The Independent caught up with Tillis, he seemed sanguine about the whole affair. 'I respect President Trump, I support the majority of his agenda, but I don't bow to anybody when the people of North Carolina are at risk and this bill puts them at risk,' he told The Independent. Trump's decision to bash a senator from a state he won and Republicans need to keep could be seen as reckless. But it also jeopardized Republicans' chances of holding onto a Senate seat Tillis consistently won by narrow margins. Tillis simply recognized a political truth: it's nearly impossible to take away an entitlement once it is embedded in federal law and people have benefited from it. Voters tend to punish the party they see as trying to take away a benefit, particularly something as intensely personal as health care. Trump should have learned this in 2017 after he failed to pass a repeal of the Affordable Care Act, aka Obamacare, when the late Arizona Sen. John McCain delivered his dramatic thumbs down. But Trump's bulldozing style and demand for absolute fealty from Republicans means he might be jeopardizing the future of the Republican majority in the Senate. Democrats already had Tillis in their crosshairs after he had voted to confirm Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and he shepherded Kash Patel's confirmation for FBI director. With an open seat, they have an even greater opportunity. A few months ago, Inside Washington listed North Carolina as the Senate seat most likely to flip. That prospect is much more likely with Tillis' departure. But Tillis is not the only swing-state Republican who faces a bind because of the bill. Inside Washington listed Susan Collins' seat in Maine as the No. 3 Senate seat most likely to flip. Collins faces a major challenge considering the bill caps the taxes on healthcare providers that states use to raise matching funds for Medicaid. As a result, Collins has put forward an amendment to increase the amount of money to shore up rural hospitals from $25 billion to $50 billion. That will certainly anger fiscal conservatives, to say nothing of Trump, despite the fact that many of his most die-hard supporters live in areas that depend on rural hospitals. Collins seems poised to run for re-election, especially after she defied gravity and beat back a Democratic challenger in 2020. But she faces a bind: if she votes yes on the bill, she will have hurt her most vulnerable voters after wringing her hands for weeks. If she opposes it, she will have crossed Trump. At age 72, choosing not to run next year is always a viable option. Republicans have 53 seats at the moment. So two seats flipping will not lose them the majority. But they also face the prospect of a bloody primary between incumbent Sen. John Cornyn and Attorney General Ken Paxton in Texas, which could create an opening for a Democrat to win in the Lone Star State. And just like how the passage of Obamacare and its ensuing aftermath led to Republicans winning Ted Kennedy's seat in Massachusetts, as well as Democratic-held seats in Arkansas, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania, the vote on this piece of legislation could easily put Republicans on the defensive in states previously considered safe like Iowa, Kansas and Nebraska. A perfect example comes from recent Democratic history. When The Independent spoke with Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, the 2024 Democratic nominee for vice president, last month, he compared it to the election that sent him to Washington. 'I believe in most part, in 2006 that one of the reasons I got elected to Congress in a tough district was over Social Security,' Walz told The Independent. Just the year before, George W. Bush had floated an idea to gradually replace Social Security with private retirements accounts. The idea backfired and Democrats ran aggressively on it in 2006, which led to Walz winning a historically red seat in Congress before he ran for governor in 2018. In the same token, the bill is already widely unpopular, much to the chagrin of Republican lawmakers, and whether it makes its way to Trump's desk or it fails, they will be bombarded with ads about how they cut Medicaid. For now, senators from both parties just have to keep on voting in the marathon series of amendments in the vote-a-rama. But the moment they walk out of the building, they will feel the brutal political climate as much as they do the muggy DC summer.
The Guardian
24 minutes ago
- The Guardian
UK court upholds Cayman Islands law legalising same-sex partnerships
A court in London has upheld a Cayman Islands law legalising same-sex civil partnerships, in a move that campaigners say could turn the tide for other British overseas territories battling for LGBTQ+ rights. On Monday, the privy council, the final court of appeal for the British overseas territory, rejected an appeal that had argued the Caribbean island's governor had no right to enact the bill, after lawmakers had rejected similar legislation. Leonardo Raznovich, acting president for the LGBTQ+ human rights organisation, Colours Caribbean, described the outcome of the long-running legal battle a 'victory for all'. The change in the law came in 2020 following a landmark court case brought by a lesbian couple – Caymanian lawyer Chantelle Day and her partner Vickie Bodden Bush, a nurse – after they were refused permission to marry. Day said the decision was a 'big relief'. 'It's an absolute relief that us and other couples in the Caymans now have the certainty that the legal framework that we all relied on for recognition of our relationships won't be pulled from underneath us and that the constitution works the way it's intended to,' she said. When the couple made their original case, the Cayman Islands' courts ultimately ruled that the right to marry extended only to opposite-sex couples, but that same-sex couples were entitled to legal protection 'which is functionally equivalent to marriage'. A bill was brought to parliament to put that protection into law, but lawmakers rejected it in July 2020 by nine votes to eight. Two months later, the then-governor, Martyn Roper, enacted the Civil Partnership Law, allowing same-sex civil partnerships, saying the action had to be taken to uphold human rights. Kattina Anglin, a lawyer based in the Cayman Islands, argued that Roper did not have the power to introduce the law under the Cayman Islands' constitution. But her case was rejected by the islands' courts and her final appeal was dismissed by the privy council. Raznovich said the decision could have implications for ongoing litigation in other British overseas territories, such as Turks and Caicos, and the British Virgin Islands. But he was less confident about the impact on cases involving independent Caribbean countries such as Trinidad and Tobago, which still have colonial era laws that criminalise consensual anal sex and where same-sex marriages and civil partnerships are prohibited. In 2018, a high court judgment repealed Trinidad and Tobago's so-called 'buggery law', but in April the country's supreme court upheld a government appeal against the ruling and recriminalised the act, forcing campaigners to take their case to the privy council. Controversial 'savings clauses', which typically were created when countries gained their independence, and were designed to preserve colonial laws unless they are changed by parliament, complicates the situation in Trinidad and Tobago and other Caribbean countries. Anglin told the Guardian she would provide a response to the decision on Thursday when she has had the time to fully review the judgment and meet with her legal team. Reuters contributed reporting
