Daniel Villarreal

During a 1971 Cinco De Mayo event at the Los Angeles gay bar The Closet, Richard Adams (a Filipino-American citizen) met Tony Sullivan (an Australian immigrant). The two began dating and fell in love. But because Sullivan entered the U.S. under a tourist visa, he wasn’t legally allowed to stay long-term.

So, in 1975, in Boulder, Colorado, the two men married. At the time, Boulder County Clerk Clela Rorex issued six same-sex marriage licenses with the local state attorney’s understanding that, because the state’s marriage law only specified “any two persons,” it didn’t explicitly forbid same-sex unions.

---

Related

America’s first out elected officials were two civil rights warriors you’ve probably never heard of

---

State Attorney General J.D. MacFarlane soon ordered the practice to stop, saying the licenses were void because they lacked legal standing. However, no Colorado court at the time ruled that the marriages had violated state law. In fact, the couple’s attorney, Lavi Soloway, pointed out that Colorado state law held that the formal opinion of a state attorney general does not carry the same force of law as the state’s pre-existing statutes and would have no impact in a judicial proceeding.

Sullivan petitioned the U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) for permanent residency, a privilege afforded to the legally married spouses of U.S. citizens. However, INS refused to recognize his marriage license and denied his petition.

You have failed to establish that a bona fide marital relationship can exist between two fa**ots.U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Services’ November 24, 1975 letter to married gay couple Richard Adams and Tony Sullivan

As part of its reasoning, the INS cited the 1967 U.S. Supreme Court decision of Boutilier v. INS in which the INS rejected the visa application of Canadian native Clive Michael Boutilier because his homosexual orientation was proof of a “psychopathic personality.”

At the time, the 1952 Immigration and Nationality Act listed “sexual deviation” as a legal criterion for denying immigrants entry. In its ruling, the Supreme Court upheld INS’ decision, even though the 1952 law didn’t clearly define what a “psychopathic personality” is. The American Psychiatric Association would later declassify homosexuality as a mental illness in 1973.

“You have failed to establish that a bona fide marital relationship can exist between two fa**ots,” the INS’s reply to the couple stated. “[A] marriage between two males is invalid for immigration purposes and cannot be considered a bona fide marital relationship since neither party to the marriage can perform the female functions in marriage.”

The couple then filed a lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Central District of California. Their lawsuit said INS had violated the U.S. Constitution’s Equal Protection Clause, which guarantees equal treatment under the law to all Americans.

In a 1979 press conference, Soloway noted that many married women, for various reasons, cannot fulfill marital “female functions.” As such, INS’ reasoning would deny federal marriage recognition and legal residence status to all sorts of opposite-sex couples.

“We’re asking the court either to say that this was a lawful marriage under Colorado law and therefore has to be the proper basis for changing immigration status or, if they’re not willing to say that, then we have to get to the question of, is there a violation of the federal guarantee of equal protection of the laws involved in this situation?” Soloway said in the 1979 press conference. “Obviously, that issue has tremendous ramifications, way beyond just the field of immigration.”

A Los Angeles federal judge eventually upheld INS’s decision in a 1985 ruling against Sullivan. He filed an appeal to stop the impending deportation proceedings, stating it would cause “extreme hardship,” but a court denied that petition, too, Esquire reported.

“My belief was if the press knew what we were doing — if we got in the press and stayed in the press —that gave us a measure of safety from the government,” Sullivan told The Washington Post in 2015. “And I think one of the reasons the press decided to be nice to us was because we were so honest.”

In 1985, the couple traveled around Europe for a year and re-entered the U.S. via Mexico in 1986. Afterward, they began speaking publicly as marriage equality advocates. When Massachusetts became the first state to legalize same-sex marriage in 2004, Soloway asked if they wanted to wed there, but the couple refused, still convinced of the legitimacy of their Colorado union.

Adams eventually became afflicted with cancer, and by 2012, the couple planned to wed in Washington state. However, before they could do so, Adams died on December 17, 2012, at the age of 65.

In 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court eventually legalized marriage equality nationwide. In an interview that year with Los Angeles’ LGBTQ+ publication The Pride, Sullivan said, “I desperately wish Richard was here with me for this.”

In 2016, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) – one of the agencies that replaced INS in 2003 – granted Sullivan permanent residency status. In 2020, USCIS issued him a work permit and a green card, finally recognizing the legitimacy of his marriage.

Then-USCIS Director Leon Rodriguez also responded to Sullivan’s letter requesting a formal apology for the INS’s insulting letter.

“This agency should never treat any individual with the disrespect shown toward you and Mr. Adams,” Rodriguez wrote. “You have my sincerest apology for the years of hurt caused by the deeply offensive and hateful language used in the November 24, 1975, decision and my deepest condolences on your loss.”

Sullivan died in November 2020, but the couple’s decades-long legal struggle was immortalized in the 2015 documentary Limited Partnership, which is currently available to stream online.

In December 2024, U.S. Secretary of the Interior Deb Haaland announced that the Boulder County Courthouse had been designated a National Historic Landmark for being the first U.S. site to issue a same-sex marriage license.

Throughout Ali’s childhood in Iraq, he was repeatedly bullied by students and teachers for what he described as his feminine behavior. During his pre-teen and teenage years, men sexually assaulted him, but he couldn’t report it to the police for fear that he’d be thrown into jail for years since Iraq has criminalized homosexuality.

Ali was afraid to come out or talk about these assaults to his family. Although he wasn’t sure if his father knew he was gay, his dad knew other LGBTQ+ people from his travels abroad for work. His father used to tell him, “One day, we’re gonna go to travel to Europe or America and have a good life,” adding, “You’re gonna be safe and you’re gonna be happy.” But then his father died of a heart attack in 2014, and Ali’s abusive older brother (10 years his senior) assumed control of the family, making Ali terrified for his future.

In November 2023, Ali went out with another man for ice cream. While they were out in the rain, five Iraqi police officers suddenly surrounded and arrested them, believing they were romantically involved. Though Ali lied and told the officers they were just cousins, the officers accused them of being prostitutes and slapped, kicked, and hit them in the streets, eventually taking them to the police station.

At the police station, they took Ali’s phone and found images of male models and some men kissing. Police said that the images confirmed Ali’s intent to conduct sex work. They forced him to sign a confession that he had had sex with another man; one officer tried to coerce Ali into performing oral sex; and the police eventually threw him in jail, leaving his family with no clue as to his whereabouts.

In the remote jail, far from the city where Ali lived, he shared a cold, small, crowded cell with about 15 other people, ranging in age from 15 to 60. The police took Ali’s clothes and gave him dirty ones to wear, along with a small blanket.

“Everyone’s sleeping next to each other [on the floor] so close, and it was just so scary,” he told LGBTQ Nation. “Like, I was thinking an animal can’t even live there.” One guard suggested that he tell other inmates that he was arrested for using counterfeit money, because if he admitted he was gay, they might mistreat him.

“I was ultimately released, but I was terrified for my safety because the police had my home address and personal information and had accused me of being gay. I believed I could be imprisoned at any time,” Ali said in a court documentexplaining his situation. “After my arrest, I knew I had to leave the country to survive. I did not feel that I could trust anyone.”

Ali’s experiences mirror that of other LGBTQ+ Middle Easterners who are entrapped, harassed, detained, and tortured under suspicion of being queer. Ali considered taking his own life to escape the persecution, but he couldn’t go through with it.

A second chance, but with the U.S. government working against him

Ali eventually applied for aid under the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program (USRAP), a 1980 federal program that has helped millions of refugees fleeing persecution in their home countries to relocate safely in the United States and build lives, families, and businesses.

Refugee processing and resettlement are lengthy processes requiring participation from numerous governmental and nongovernmental entities. Ali, like thousands of refugees, first underwent extensive security checks and referrals before being approved under USRAP and resettling into a single apartment in the United States.

“When I learned I would be resettled in Dallas, I was so excited that I began screaming with happiness and jumping and dancing,” Ali said.

It’s hard to know exactly how many LGBTQ+ people seek asylum in the U.S., but a 2021 study by the Williams Institute estimated that 11,400 LGBTQ+ individuals did so between 2012 and 2017. Approximately 4,385 of them made asylum claims specifically related to their LGBTQ+ status.

I am very concerned that if people back in Iraq learned about my sexual orientation and my interactions with the police, my family would be in danger.Ali, a gay Iraqi refugee currently living in Dallas, Texas

He came to the U.S. with only $120 to his name. Upon arrival, Catholic Charities provided him with a case manager and financial assistance for his first three months, as well as help in finding other programs to assist him in getting a job and obtaining basic necessities. Ali soon applied for a matching grant program that would cover one year of rent and utilities and provide him a monthly allowance, as well as a Refugee Cash Assistance program to provide a monthly stipend for six months and potentially longer.

However, by early February, he was notified that both programs had shut down due to an executive order signed by Donald Trump on January 20, entitled “Realigning the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program.” The order claimed that federally funded programs for admitting refugees aren’t in the country’s best interests because they “compromise the availability” of “taxpayer resources” for American citizens.

Trump’s order effectively halted refugee admissions indefinitely, ending USRAP and freezing millions in congressionally appropriated USRAP funding. Trump’s order threw Ali’s life into disarray, stranded thousands of other refugees and separated families who had already been approved under USRAP, and ended the funding of various groups and charities that used federal funding to provide vital survival benefits to refugees.

Ali learned that the case manager helping him secure benefits had been laid off after Trump’s order, and his apartment managers told him he might be evicted if he couldn’t pay the rent. Running out of food, he subsisted on peanut butter. 

In response to the chaos, the International Refugee Assistance Project (IRAP) filed Pacito v. Trump on February 10 in the Western District of Washington. The case is a class action lawsuit filed on behalf of the individuals and major resettlement agencies harmed by Trump’s order. It asserts that, by indefinitely ending USRAP, Trump and federal agencies exceeded their lawful authority and violated both federal law – and rulemaking procedures required under the Administrative Procedure Act – as well as the Constitution. The lawsuit seeks to block the order, restore funding, and enforce long-established protections for refugees.

In March, a district court agreed with IRAP’s lawsuit and granted a preliminary injunction against Trump’s order, writing, “The results have been harrowing.” The court noted that refugees have few (if any) rights – they have no right to work; limited access to healthcare, housing, or education; and often face discrimination.

Luckily, a charity helped Ali find a job at a local coffee shop, and he also secured a second job at a local mall. He had learned English, he said, by watching old episodes of Keeping Up with the Kardashians, a reality TV show about an ethnically Armenian celebrity family living in the United States. Now, he has made several good friends and has started building a community by attending a local church.

But other individual refugees who had been approved to come to the U.S. under USRAP after years of processing have either been stranded in the U.S. without homes or work or else trapped in their home or host countries as their scheduled flights to the U.S. were abruptly canceled, the district court wrote in its May decision. This has left the refugees vulnerable to physical danger and financial hardship without stable housing, income, basic necessities, alternative paths to refuge, or access to integration services that would help them become self-sufficient.

Furthermore, Trump’s order effectively defunded congressionally mandated resettlement-support services, making them unable to pay their employees and keep their offices open and undermining decades of work building up infrastructures, relationships, and the associated goodwill to facilitate refugee integration in local communities. The order required these services to furlough or lay off hundreds of staff all over the United States, threatening their continued existence.

The courts are trying to restrain Trump, but he has other plans

In April, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals granted the federal government a partial emergency stay of the district court’s injunction. While the appeals court has required the government to reinstate resettlement and placement services to refugees for 90 days after their admission into the United States, the court also appointed a magistrate judge to help review individual cases of refugees harmed by Trump’s order, while IRAP’s class action suit continues to be heard by the courts.

“Iraq is a very unsafe place for LGBTQ+ people,” Ali said in his court filing. “When I speak to people back in Iraq, I hide the fact that I’m gay and that the police arrested and abused me for being gay… I am very concerned that if people back in Iraq learned about my sexual orientation and my interactions with the police, my family would be in danger.”

I want to help everyone in my situation because it is difficult for me now, and I know there are other refugees who recently arrived and are struggling even more than me. Ali, a gay Iraqi refugee currently living in Dallas, Texas

Ali also worries that, if he criticizes the Trump Administration for ending USRAP, conservative organizations could somehow locate his name and personal information for harassment or violent retaliation. If his name is made public, it could make it even more difficult for him to find employment or could lead to other kinds of anti-immigrant and anti-gay discrimination.

Ali understands that, in this case, he’s not only representing himself, but thousands of other refugees nationwide and across the world. “I want to help everyone in my situation because it is difficult for me now, and I know there are other refugees who recently arrived and are struggling even more than me.”

The Trump Administration is considering a radical overhaul of USRAP that would continue to largely defund the program and reduce the number of refugees allowed annually into the U.S. from 125,000 (the number established by former President Joe Biden) to 7,500. Trump’s plan would give preferred relocation assistance to English speakers, white South Africans, and Europeans who have left their countries after making anti-immigrant statements or supporting anti-immigrant political parties, The New York Times reported on October 15.

“[Trump’s plan reflects] a preexisting notion… as to who are the true Americans,” said Barbara L. Strack, a former chief of the refugee affairs division at Citizenship and Immigration Services during the Bush, Obama and Trump administrations. “And they think it’s white people and they think it’s Christians.”

In a statement, IRAP wrote, “These actions reflect a broader pattern of President Trump attempting to strong-arm other branches of government into rubber-stamping his political agenda, sidestepping the checks and balances Congress established to ensure refugee policy serves humanitarian – not partisan- ends. Such departures from established process and principle undermine the United States’ legal obligations and moral leadership, sending a dangerous message that access to refuge may depend on identity rather than need.”

Immigration narratives in politics and media mostly focus on the southern border, with the current U.S. president evoking racist images of Mexican gang members invading, South American cartels smuggling drugs, and Black immigrants eating cats and dogs in the United States.

These narratives are, in a word, bullshit. At various times, majorities of undocumented immigrants in the U.S. didn’t cross the southern border, they overstayed their visas. Most fentanyl brought into the U.S. was smuggled in by U.S. citizens. Immigrants commit crimes at a much lower rate than U.S. citizens. And as for cats and dogs, the vice president and others have admitted that the story is BS.

Both mainstream political parties have long treated immigrants like pawns and bargaining chips in an endless game that leaves people’s lives and safety hanging in a confusing bureaucratic maze where legal residence and permanent citizenship remain uncertain and elusive, depending on whoever is president at any given time.

It’s a shame how thoroughly distorted our understanding of immigration has become as a result. A large majority of southern migrants are asylum-seekers fleeing persecution in their home countries, working undocumented immigrants pay an estimated $16 billion annually into Social Security and Medicare (and don’t collect any benefits), and studies show that immigrants increase jobs and housing, despite claims to the contrary.

Often missing from all this rhetoric are the voices of actual immigrants, including LGBTQ+ people and people from non-American continents. We get the contemporary political framing without any nuanced historical context, and lots of xenophobic doomsaying with few words from advocates fighting for immigrants’ dignity and constitutionally protected legal rights.

While LGBTQ Nation has long reported on queer refugees and the administration’s anti-immigrant abuses, this month, we’re elevating marginalized voices and uncovering vital historical context to reveal “The Untold Stories of Queer Immigration.”

One of our earliest stories in this monthly edition is an interview with out U.S. Rep. Emily Randall (D-WA)) discussing her observations at an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) detainment facility as well as why immigrant rights matter to non-immigrant citizens.

Our cover story talks to activists and refugees connected to Rainbow Railroad, a not-for-profit organization that helps relocate LGBTQ+ refugees. One article will revisit the historic 1975 case of Richard Adams and Tony Sullivan, a bi-national gay couple whose case was the first U.S. lawsuit to seek federal recognition of a same-sex marriage for immigration purposes. 

We’ll share the experiences of African and Iraqi refugees to hear their stories of escape and relocation while navigating possible asylum in the United States. Our interview with the Black LGBTQIA+ Migrant Project will look at the unique needs and challenges in providing support to migrants from across the Black diaspora.

We’ll also take several glimpses into immigration’s cultural aspects by covering the trans and nonbinary celebrities who are fighting the Trump administration’s needlessly biased passport policies, documentaries that examine the queer immigrant experience in the United States, and a look at how migration forced by climate change uniquely impacts LGBTQ+ emigrants.

Many of these stories might otherwise go untold or underappreciated, so we’re proud to help elevate them. They help provide insight and the real human side of a complicated issue and reflect on overlooked aspects of our community’s resilience, resistance, and power in the U.S. and across the globe.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has appeared at least four times on the Reformation Red Pill podcast, a far-right podcast hosted by Joshua Haymes, an anti-LGBTQ+ extremist who was also a former pastor at the church that Hegseth attends, The Guardian reported. 

The publication noted that Haymes wants to execute adulterers and people who have abortions, that he seemingly called for the deaths of LGBTQ+ Pride marchers, and also considers liberalism a greater threat to the nation than neo-Nazism.

Haymes is aligned with the Communion of Reformed Evangelical Churches (CREC), a Christian Nationalist denomination that believes the United States should be subject to biblical law, and is both a member and former pastoral intern of the Pilgrim Hill Reformed Fellowship church in Goodlettsville, Tennessee, where Hegseth and his family are members.

On August 5, Haymes posted a statement on X, which said, “I used to say homosexuality is no worse than other sins. All sin separates us from God after all! I was wrong. Sexual sin is uniquely evil. Sodomy is an abomination to God, along with crossdressing… It’s important for Christians to say so.”

While Haymes’ post included a Bible verse calling cross-dressing an “abomination,” Biblical laws also require the death penalty for anyone who practices fortune telling, curses their mother or father, accidentally kills someone else’s animal, or commits blasphemy. Other Old Testament laws demand death for anyone who charges interest on loans or works on Saturdays.

Most contemporary Christians don’t follow these ancient Biblical laws and say that the crucifixion of Jesus Christ made them obsolete. However, conservative Christians tend to cite anti-LGBTQ+ Bible verses as proof that God shares their hatred of LGBTQ+ people while ignoring Bible verses against other “sins”, like eating shellfish and wearing clothing made of two different fabrics.

On August 13, Haymes posted an image praising Italy for banning lesbian couples from becoming parents, writing, “By the grace of God, we will see this done in these United States.”

In October 2024, Haymes wrote on X, “Mutilating children, Or being an accomplice to mutilating children should be a capital offense. Jesus recommends execution by drowning.” 

The post included an image of a man being drowned in the ocean with a large millstone tied to his neck. The image refers to a New Testament Bible verse that says those who cause children to stumble or sin would be better off being drowned in the sea with a large millstone hung around their neck.

In a June 28 post, Haymes posted footage of marchers in the Nashville, Tennessee Pride Parade and wrote, “We’re short on millstones at the Nashville Pride parade. This is sick. This is child abuse.”

When asked about his post, Haymes told the aforementioned publication, “I do not advocate for violence against Pride marchers. I do not advocate for violence of any kind. I do not believe that anyone should be drowning anyone in this scenario… My role is simply to give that warning. Pride marchers who are sexualizing children are in for a very, very harsh judgment when they stand before their maker.”

When asked for a comment about Haymes, a Pentagon spokesperson pointed to a statement declaring that “[Hegseth] is a proud member of a church that is affiliated with the Congregation of Reformed Evangelical Churches which was founded by Pastor Doug Wilson. He is a very proud Christian and has those traditional Christian viewpoints.” 

Earlier this month, Hegseth reposted a video in which Wilson said he’d like laws against homosexuality to be reinstated in all 50 states.

Ohio State Republicans have introduced numerous anti-LGBTQ+ bills during this legislative session, including one that would out LGBTQ+ students to their parents if they receive any related counseling, a bill requiring transgender politicians to list their deadnames on public records, a law restricting trans students’ ability to use preferred names and pronouns in schools, and a ban on drag (even though federal courts have blocked similar laws for violating free speech rights).

State Democrats have also introduced legislation to enshrine LGBTQ+ non-discrimination protections as well as a ban on so-called conversion therapy into law. None of the bills have received hearings so far. The Ohio legislature is currently on summer break and will reconvene in the fall. 

Among the bills introduced by state GOP legislators are Ohio House Bill 190, which would require parents to submit school permission slips for educators to address students by different names or pronouns that differ from the names and gender listed on their birth certificates. Republicans nationwide have tried to claim that affirming students’ trans and nonbinary identities without parental disclosure is a form of “indoctrination” and “trans-ing” kids.

With that in mind, state Republicans have also introduced Ohio House Bill 172, which would ban kids 14 years and older from receiving mental health services without parental consent. This would include any child who receives school “counseling services or monitoring related to the student’s mental, emotional, or physical health or well-being, or the school’s ability to provide a safe and supportive learning environment for the student,” the bill states.

The bill would force educators to forcibly out queer students who seek counseling for LGBTQ+ issues, including students who are bothered by psychological distress, anti-LGBTQ+ bullying, or are experiencing problems with academic performance.

Another bill, Ohio House Bill 196 would require trans and nonbinary political candidates to list their deadnames on candidacy petitions. The bill comes after a 2024 incident in which several trans candidates for elected office in Ohio were disqualified because they didn’t disclose their deadnames when filing campaign paperwork. One candidate said she didn’t even know about this requirement.

The following year, Ohio Secretary of State Frank LaRose (R) changed the candidate forms to require candidates to “include all prior names used in the past 5 years,” outside of those that resulted from marriage. This bill would essentially enshrine the form change into law. Currently, people in Ohio can change the gender marker on their state birth certificate, but it requires a court order. 

Lastly, Ohio House Bill 249, would ban drag performers from performing any place not designated as an adult entertainment facility. The bill would designate as an “adult cabaret performance” any act that involves “performers or entertainers who exhibit a gender identity that is different from the performer’s or entertainer’s biological sex using clothing, makeup, prosthetic or imitation genitals or breasts, or other physical markers.”

The law ostensibly restricts any displays that are “obscene or harmful to juveniles,” and “wouldn’t prohibit or restrict a bona fide film, theatrical, or other artistic endeavor or performance that is not obscene or harmful to juveniles.” 

But the state’s definition of obscenity refers to any content designed to “appeal to the prurient interest, depict sexual conduct in a patently offensive way, and lack serious artistic, literary, or scientific value when taken as a whole.”

As such, the law would forbid any non-adult cabaret venue — such as a library, movie theatre, playhouse, or bar — from showing any media or performance that depicts cross-dressing or transgender individuals, if anyone considered them even remotely obscene. Courts have blocked similar drag bans from going into effect in Florida, Tennessee, and Texas, calling the laws vague, overbroad, and burdensome for businesses to follow without fear of persecution.

State Democrats have introduced Ohio Senate Bill 70 (aka. the Ohio Fairness Act), which would include sexual orientation and gender identity into pre-existing anti-discrimination laws. The bill has been introduced in every legislative session since 2011, and this is the first time since 2018 that it has received no Republican support. The Ohio Capital Journal reported.

Additionally, Ohio Senate Bill 71 would ban any licensed health professionals from providing conversion therapy as a mental health treatment to minors. Numerous studies (and all major American medical and psychological associations) disavow conversion therapy as an ineffective, needless, pseudoscientific form of psychological torture. 

Nevertheless, over 1,320 conversion therapists remain active across the U.S., including in states with bans in place, according to a report from the LGBTQ+ youth suicide prevention organization The Trevor Project.

The report found that licensed therapists, counselors, social workers, and unlicensed practitioners “advocate for and/or directly engage in” conversion therapy. Many discreetly advertise their services using terms like “sexual attraction fluidity exploration,” “rapid-onset gender dysphoria,” “sexual addiction,” “sexual wholeness,” “sexual integrity,” and claims to help clients “align their related behaviors with their faith.”