A Florida city suspended one of its council members over hateful social media posts, including one mocking victims of the Pulse shooting. Now, she has sued while alleging that some of the posts were doctored.
The Groveland City Council last week suspended Councilwoman Judith Fike after nearly decade-old posts resurfaced, including one in which she wrote victims of the nearby Pulse mass shooting were killed more easily than if they had been hurled from buildings.
According to The Orlando Sentinel, the post read: “‘Duh….why would the shooter target a gay club? My answer…Easier than marching them up steps to push off the roof..some sarcasm, some truth..”
At the meeting where she was suspended, Fike said that the 2016 post had been misconstrued. “It was meant as a support of the community,” she said, according to Central Florida Public Media.
Fike said she was alluding to killings happening in the Middle East at the time, where ISIS leaders were reportedly executing queer people in Syria by throwing them from rooftops. Pulse shooter Omar Mateen pledged allegiance to ISIS during a standoff with law enforcement the night he killed 49 mostly LGBTQ+ and Latine victims at the Orlando club.
But colleagues on the Groveland Council also raised concerns, according to News 6, about other posts, including one of Ronald Reagan with a monkey in a post that said he was “babysitting” Barack Obama, the nation’s first Black president.
Fike said she was responsible for some of the controversial posts, but that others had been manipulated and had words added to appear more offensive.
Following the suspension, Fike filed a lawsuit that alleges the city had no power to take that action.
“It just simply does not have that authority; most cities don’t,” Fike’s attorney, Anthony Sabatini, told the Sentinel.
Fike was appointed last year to fill a vacancy on the City Council and is up for election in November.
Baylor University, a Baptist institution in Waco, Texas, announced Wednesday that it would rescind its acceptance of a $643,000 grant that it had recently been awarded to study the inclusion of women and LGBTQ people in the church.
In a letter posted to the university’s website, Baylor University President Linda Livingstone said returning the funds “is the appropriate course of action and in the best interests” of the school.
“We remain committed to providing a loving and caring community for all — including our LGBTQIA+ students — because it is part and parcel of our University’s mission that calls us to educate our students within a caring Christian community,” Livingstone’s letter said.
She added: “As we reviewed the details and process surrounding this grant, our concerns did not center on the research itself, but rather on the activities that followed as part of the grant. Specifically, the work extended into advocacy for perspectives on human sexuality that are inconsistent with Baylor’s institutional policies, including our Statement on Human Sexuality.”
The university’s Statement on Human Sexuality says, in part: “The University affirms the biblical understanding of sexuality as a gift from God. Christian churches across the ages and around the world have affirmed purity in singleness and fidelity in marriage between a man and a woman as the biblical norm. Temptations to deviate from this norm include both heterosexual sex outside of marriage and homosexual behavior.”
Wednesday’s announcement comes just nine days after the university announced its Center for Church and Community Impact had been awarded a sizable grant from the Eula Mae and John Baugh Foundation “to help foster inclusion and belonging in the church.”
“Through academic research, this grant will help us better understand the disenfranchisement and exclusion of LGBTQIA+ individuals and women within congregations to nurture institutional courage and foster change,” the June 30 announcement, which was removed from the university’s website, said.
The Eula Mae and John Baugh Foundation, according to its website, is a nonprofit family foundation that “supports progressive, inclusive, nonprofit organizations that reflect the love of Christ.” Among its funding priorities, its website notes, “faith-based post-secondary education,” “social justice and advocacy” and “inclusivity initiatives.”
In a statement emailed to NBC News, the foundation said it’s “deeply saddened by Baylor’s decision” to cancel the research grant, adding that it “disserves Baylor students, faculty, and the broader Christian community.”
“This was an opportunity to answer the Christian call to care for the marginalized by creating resources and providing important research for faith communities. Our hearts break for the professors, research fellows, and, especially, the students who will receive this message from Baylor, loud and clear,” the statement said. “We hope this moment will be a catalyst for reflection and will inspire other institutions to take up the important work that Baylor has abandoned.”
Donald Trump‘s Department of Education is drafting plans to gut a student loan forgiveness program for public servants — and employees of LGBTQ+ groups are being singled out.
Trump signed an executive order in March dismantling access to the Public Service Loan Forgiveness (PSLF) program, directly pointing to nonprofits that serve transgender people as ineligible for loan forgiveness. Now, the Education Department has unveiled drafted plansthat would follow through with the order. The cuts are expected to disproportionately impact LGBTQ+ people, who are more likely to have student loans and more likely to work for nonprofits.
“The proposed restrictions on student loans will particularly affect the nearly one-quarter of LGBTQ adults employed in the public or nonprofit sectors, which qualify for the Public Student Loan Forgiveness program,” Brad Sears, Distinguished Senior Scholar of Law and Policy at the Williams Institute, said in a statement. This “could potentially disqualify anyone working for an organization involved in gender-affirming care, or possibly those serving transgender individuals more broadly, from the PSLF program.”
Here’s everything you need to know about the proposed PSLF changes, and how LGBTQ+ organizations could be affected.
What is the Public Service Loan Forgiveness program?
The Public Service Loan Forgiveness (PSLF) program forgives the student loans of those who work for federal, state, tribal, or local government, or for non-profit organizations, after they’ve made payments for ten years (120 payments). The program was created as part of the 2007 College Cost Reduction and Access Act and signed into law by President George W. Bush as a way to encourage students to pursue careers in public service.
The first borrowers who were able to obtain forgiveness were in October, 2017, though the vast majority of people who have applied for forgiveness have been rejected. The U.S. Department of Education released data in 2020 revealing that out of 180,798 processed applications, only 3,376 were approved while 177,422 (98.5 percent) were rejected. Of those who were approved, 74 percent worked for the government and 26 percent worked for non-profit organizations.
What does Trump’s PSLF executive order do?
Trump signed an executive order in March that drastically limits who qualifies for PSLF, preventing forgiveness for people who work at organizations that engage in the supposed “subsidization of illegal activities, including illegal immigration, human smuggling, child trafficking, pervasive damage to public property, and disruption of the public order.”
The order directly singled out organizations that assist trans people, including with gender-affirming care, which it falsely refers to as “child abuse, including the chemical and surgical castration or mutilation of children.”
The order also targeted organizations that Trump claims are “trafficking children to so-called transgender sanctuary States for purposes of emancipation from their lawful parents, in violation of applicable law.” Sanctuary states have laws preventing those who receive gender-affirming care from being prosecuted by states that have banned it. Trump’s executive order against the life-saving care, which is being challenged in court, is not law.
Trump’s executive order would task the Secretary of Education, Linda McMahon, with creating a standard determining if a qualifying employer has engaged in the “subsidization of illegal activities.” The Education Department would be required to give notice to employers deemed ineligible, and the ability to appeal to the decision, with a final judgment being issued by a state or federal court.
Payments from borrowers employed at organizations that are stripped of their PSLF eligibility will only count towards student loan forgiveness until the cut off date of July 1, 2026.
What LGBTQ+ organizations will be ineligible for PSLF?
While no specific organizations have yet been named publicly as ineligible for PSLF under Trump’s new rules, LGBTQ+ organizations operating as 501(c)(3) nonprofits are likely to be targeted. Even large legal groups like the American Civil Liberties Union or Lambda Legal working to legally protect gender-affirming care could be misconstrued as the “subsidization of illegal activities.”
Employees of hospitals who provide gender-affirming care could also lose PSLF, as could teachers at public schools that refuse to comply with Trump’s orders to misgender and out trans students, ban trans students from sports teams and facilities that align with their gender identity, or any other policy handed down by the administration.
Trump’s order also targets groups that he claims are “engaging in a pattern of aiding and abetting illegal discrimination.” This is a reference to diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives, which are not policies that give some groups preferential treatment as Trump implies, but rather suggestions to enforce and comply with existing anti-discrimination protections. Under the order, any organization that works with LGBTQ+ communities or communities of color could lose eligibility.
How will PSLF cancellations affect LGBTQ+ people?
Trump’s federal student loan restrictions are expected to disproportionately impact LGBTQ+ people, who are more likely to have student loans and experience economic insecurity, poverty, and disabilities.
More than one-third (35 percent) of LGBTQ+ adults ages 18 to 40 — an estimated 2.9 million — held more than $93.2 billion in federal student loans at the beginning of the Biden Administration, according to a March report from the Williams Institute and the Point Foundation, including over half (51 percent) of trans adults, 36 percent of cisgender LBQ women, and 28 percent of cisgender GBQ men.
Through loan forgiveness, new repayment plans, the expansion of the Public Service Loan Forgiveness Program (PSLF), and relief for students with disabilities, the Biden administration approved over $183 billion in student debt relief for more than five million borrowers. Assuming that LGBTQ+ adults received the benefits equally, an estimated 11.6 percent of queer adults with student loans — about 336,000 — benefited.
“I hated my body,” the nonbinary 16-year-old said. “I hated looking at it.”
When therapy didn’t help, Pitchenik, who uses the pronoun they, started going to the Center for Transyouth Health and Development at Children’s Hospital Los Angeles, the country’s biggest public provider of gender-affirming care for children and teens. It changed their life.
But in response to the Trump administration’s threat to cut federal funds to places that offer gender-affirming care to minors, the center will be closing its doors July 22. Pitchenik has been among the scores of protesters who have demonstrated regularly outside the hospital to keep it open.
Sage Sol Pitchenik in Santa Clarita, Calif., on Monday.Jae C. Hong / AP
“Trans kids are done being quiet. Trans kids are done being polite, and trans kids are done begging for the bare minimum, begging for the chance to grow up, to have a future, to be loved by others when sometimes we can’t even love ourselves,” Pitchenik said, prompting cheers from dozens of protesters during a recent demonstration.
They went to the center for six years.
“There’s a lot of bigotry and just hate all around, and having somebody who is trained specifically to speak with you, because there’s not a lot of people that know what it’s like, it meant the world,” they told The Associated Press.
The center’s legacy
In operation for three decades, the facility is among the longest-running trans youth centers in the country and has served thousands of young people on public insurance.
Patients who haven’t gone through puberty yet receive counseling, which continues throughout the care process. For some patients, the next step is puberty blockers; for others, it’s also hormone replacement therapy. Surgeries are rarely offered to minors.
“I’m one of the lucky ones,” said Pitchenik, who received hormone blockers after a lengthy process. “I learned how to not only survive but how to thrive in my own body because of the lifesaving health care provided to me right here at Children’s Hospital Los Angeles.”
Many families are now scrambling to find care among a patchwork of private and public providers that are already stretched thin. It’s not just patient care, but research development that’s ending.
“It is a disappointment to see this abrupt closure disrupting the care that trans youth receive. But it’s also a stain on their legacy,” said Maria Do, community mobilization manager at the Los Angeles LGBT Center. “I think it showcases that they’re quick to abandon our most vulnerable members.”
Maria Do, community mobilization manager at the Los Angeles LGBT Center, outside Children’s Hospital Los Angeles on Thursday.Jae C. Hong / AP
The closure comes weeks after the Supreme Court upheld Tennessee’s ban on gender-affirming care for minors, amid other efforts by the federal government to regulate the lives of transgender people.
The hospital initially backed off its plans to close after it announced them in February, spurring demonstrations, but later doubled back.
The center said in a statement that “despite this deeply held commitment to supporting LA’s gender-diverse community, the hospital has been left with no viable path forward” to stay open.
“Center team members were heartbroken to learn of the decision from hospital leaders, who emphasized that it was not made lightly, but followed a thorough legal and financial assessment of the increasingly severe impacts of recent administrative actions and proposed policies,” the statement said.
California Attorney General Rob Bonta has warned that by closing the center, the hospital is violating state antidiscrimination laws, but his office hasn’t taken any further actions. Bonta and attorney generals from 22 other states sued the Trump administration over the executive order in February.
“The Trump administration’s relentless assault on transgender adolescents is nothing short of an all-out war to strip away LGBTQ+ rights,” Bonta told the AP in an email. “The Administration’s harmful attacks are hurting California’s transgender community by seeking to scare doctors and hospitals from providing nondiscriminatory healthcare. The bottom line is: This care remains legal in California.”
LGBTQ protesters and health care workers offer visibility
Still wearing scrubs, Jack Brenner, joined protesters after a long shift as a nurse in the hospital’s emergency room, addressing the crowd with a megaphone while choking back tears.
“Our visibility is so important for our youth,” Brenner said, looking out at a cluster of protesters raising signs and waving trans pride flags. “To see that there is a future, and that there is a way to grow up and to be your authentic self.”
Jack Brenner, an emergency room nurse at Children’s Hospital Los Angeles, on Thursday.Jae C. Hong / AP
Brenner, who uses the pronoun they, didn’t see people who looked like them growing up or come to understand what being trans meant until their mid-20s.
“It’s something I definitely didn’t have a language for when I was a kid, and I didn’t know what the source of my pain and suffering was, and now looking back, so many things are sliding into place,” Brenner said. “I’m realizing how much gender dysphoria was a source of my pain.”
Trans children and teens are at increased risk of death by suicide, according to a 2024 study from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Brenner described encountering young patients in the emergency room who are trans or otherwise on the gender-nonconforming spectrum and “at the peak of a mental health crisis.” Brenner wears a lanyard teeming with colorful pins emblazoned with the words “they/them” to signal their gender identity.
Jack Brenner shows their lanyard decorated with pronoun pins and buttons.Jae C. Hong / AP
“I see the change in kids’ eyes, little glints of recognition, that I am a trans adult and that there is a future,” Brenner said. “I’ve seen kids light up when they recognize something of themselves in me. And that is so meaningful that I can provide that.”
Beth Hossfeld, a marriage and family therapist, and a grandmother to an 11- and 13-year-old who received care at the center, called the closure “patient abandonment.”
“It’s a political decision, not a medical one, and that’s disturbing to me,” she said.
While this year has brought deep challenges — including harmful federal policies that threaten our safety and well-being — we know that joy, connection, and care are acts of resistance. They are vital to our survival. That’s why today, we’re overjoyed to share a bright moment of our own: Positive Images is moving to a new home!
For nearly a decade, we’ve welcomed you into our space on Montgomery Drive — a place where we laughed, cried, found community, and held each other through it all. But we’ve outgrown it. Our community deserves a center that matches our dreams: more spacious, more accessible, and ready to hold even more love.
This new center will be so much more than a building. It will be a beacon of light for our community — a place where transness is celebrated, where immigrant communities are valued and protected, and where queer joy and belonging thrive. In the face of darkness, we continue to create our own light. We believe no policy or politician can dim our brilliance. And this move is a testament to that — a bold step toward building the LGBTQIA2S+ center our community deserves.
We invite you to be part of this journey with us. If you’re able, please consider making a gift to help us build and sustain this new space. Every dollar goes directly to creating a safer, more affirming home for all of us.
Thank you for standing with us, for believing in joy as resistance, and for helping us turn this dream into a reality. With fierce love and excitement, The Positive Images Team
Queride Comunidad,
Aunque este año ha traído desafíos profundos — incluidas políticas federales dañinas que amenazan nuestra seguridad y bienestar — sabemos que la alegría, la conexión y el cuidado son actos de resistencia. Son vitales para nuestra supervivencia.
Por eso hoy, compartimos con muchísima emoción un momento brillante: ¡Positive Images se está mudando a un nuevo hogar! Durante casi una década, les hemos dado la bienvenida en nuestro espacio en Montgomery Drive — un lugar donde reímos, lloramos, encontramos comunidad y nos cuidamos mutuamente. Pero ya nos quedó chico. Nuestra comunidad merece un centro que refleje nuestros sueños: más amplio, más accesible y listo para abrazar aún más amor.
Este nuevo centro será mucho más que un edificio. Será un faro de luz para nuestra comunidad — un lugar donde se celebra la transgeneridad, donde valoramos y protegemos a nuestras comunidades inmigrantes, y donde florecen la alegría queer y el sentido de pertenencia. Ante la oscuridad, seguimos creando nuestra propia luz. Creemos que ninguna política ni polítique puede apagar nuestro brillo. Y esta mudanza es un testimonio de eso — un paso valiente hacia la construcción del centro LGBTQIA2S+ que nuestra comunidad merece.
Te invitamos a ser parte de este camino con nosotres. Si puedes, considera hacer una donación para ayudarnos a construir y sostener este nuevo espacio. Cada dólar va directamente a crear un hogar más seguro y afirmante para todes.
Gracias por estar con nosotres, por creer en la alegría como resistencia y por ayudarnos a convertir este sueño en realidad. Con amor feroz y muchísima emoción, El equipo de Positive Images
Follow the journey on Instagram with our weekly vlogs! ¡Sigue el viaje en Instagram con nuestros vlogs semanales!
Philanthropic support for LGBTQ+ causes is collapsing just as queer and transcommunities face an escalating national crisis. New data from Funders for LGBTQ Issues shows foundation funding for LGBTQ+ organizations in the U.S. dropped sharply to $209.4 million in 2023. That’s a staggering decline of nearly $49 million, or 19 percent, from 2022. When adjusted for inflation, that cut deepens to 22 percent.
Even as the funding picture grows increasingly dire, many philanthropic institutions are opting to remain anonymous. The report omits the names of top funders and grantees for the first time in decades, reflecting a growing trend among donors who fear political retaliation and the increased hostility toward progressive causes under the current administration.
It’s a devastating trend arriving at precisely the moment when a second Trump presidency has declared open political war on transgender people, fueling state and federal policies designed to erase LGBTQ+ existence from public life. The Funders for LGBTQ Issues report makes clear the danger: for every $100 awarded by U.S. foundations in 2023, only 20 cents specifically supported LGBTQ communities, a decrease from 25 cents the previous year.
After the most inclusive U.S. president, President Joe Biden, stepped down from reelection and LGBTQ+ ally Vice President Kamala Harris lost the 2024 contest, President Donald Trump’s return to power has been defined by chaos and an obsessive focus on erasing transgender people from law and society. In the first half of 2025 alone, legislatures in 49 states have introduced 947 anti-trans bills, with 118 already enacted. That tsunami of legislation builds on the record-breaking surge of 701 anti-trans bills introduced in 2024, including an unprecedented 88 bills at the federal level, according to the Trans Legislation Tracker.
These bills range from the cruel to the surreal. Missouri lawmakers proposed felony charges and mandatory sex offender registration for teachers who support a child’s social transition. West Virginia’s legislature declared transgender identity a mental disorder, reminiscent of decades when homosexuality itself was pathologized. Across the country, new laws mandate forced outing of trans students, criminalize gender-affirming medical care, and redefine gender as an immutable biological fact.
The Trump administration has doubled down with executive orders that read like ideological manifestos. One bans trans women from women’s sports. Another order requires the federal government to remove references to gender identity from regulations. Other orders recast gender-affirming medical care as “mutilation” and threaten providers with criminal penalties. These policies don’t merely shift bureaucratic language; they stoke a cultural war that emboldens states to escalate legislative attacks.
Yet, precisely as the scale of the crisis explodes, the lifelines that sustain LGBTQ+ advocacy are drying up. As The Advocate previously reported, the Human Rights Campaign, GLSEN, and The Trevor Project all announced layoffsin the past year, citing shrinking donations and economic uncertainty.
The financial retreat cuts deepest in the communities most at risk. Funding for transgender, gender-nonconforming, and nonbinary communities fell from $48.2 million in 2022 to just $36.4 million in 2023, a 24 percent decrease. Similarly, grants for Black LGBTQ+ communities and causes fell by $14.5 million, a steep 41 percent drop from the all-time high in 2022 that followed the racial justice protests after George Floyd’s murder. Funding for LGBTQ+ youth plunged by 42 percent in 2023 to just $38.4 million, despite rising threats to trans children’s safety and health.
Historically, tragedies like the Pulse nightclub massacre and Floyd’s murder triggered spikes in philanthropic giving. But as Funders for LGBTQ Issues President Saida Agostini-Bostic writes in the new report, no similar surge has materialized to counter today’s unprecedented wave of anti-trans legislation. Private and community foundation funding, the bedrock of LGBTQ+ philanthropy, suffered some of the sharpest cuts, with private foundations decreasing giving by 27 percent and community foundations dropping 39 percent compared to 2022.
Despite grim figures, there are flickers of hope. Lambda Legal recently concluded a $285 million fundraising campaign, surpassing its goal by $100 million, with 95 percent of donations coming from individual donors rather than major foundations. Still, Lambda’s windfall cannot offset a sector-wide crisis, as the vast majority of LGBTQ+ advocacy and services depend on institutional grants rather than individual donors alone.
The crisis has also exposed the fragility of the funding ecosystem. According to the report, the top 10 funders accounted for 46 percent of all LGBTQ+ grants in 2023, but awarded 26 percent less money than they did in 2022.
The top 20 funders collectively slashed their giving by nearly a quarter, with no corresponding increase from smaller foundations to fill the gap. The report warns that this top-heavy structure makes the entire funding landscape volatile—one or two large funders pulling back can destabilize LGBTQ+ organizations nationwide.
As anti-trans bills multiply and federal hostility intensifies, LGBTQ+ communities stand at a crossroads. The stakes have never been higher politically and culturally. The data offers a stark warning, Agostini-Bostic said, writing, “If not now, when? If not us, who?”
“We created our books for all children. We believe young people need to see themselves and families like theirs in the books they read; this is especially true for LGBTQ+ children and LGBTQ+ families. And all children need to learn how to share their classrooms and communities with people different from themselves. Books can help them understand one another and learn to treat each other with acceptance, kindness and respect.
We know there are families and educators across the country who are committed to creating inclusive classrooms that meet the needs of the diverse groups of students in their school districts. We are with them in spirit as they work to ensure that all students are seen and supported.”
In addition, several of the individual authors and illustrators have distributed their own statements about the reasons they wrote their books and why the justices got it so wrong. “Uncle Bobby’s Wedding,” the story of a young girl who fears she will spend less time with her uncle after he gets married to his partner, was featured prominently in both the oral argument and final ruling surrounding the case. The author of that book, Sarah Brannen, penned a statement that exposed the harmful consequences of banning books like hers and creating an a-la-carte public education system where not all students receive the same standard of learning:
“The Supreme Court’s decision in Mahmoud v. Taylor will have dire consequences for public education and LGBTQ+ children and families. Allowing parents to remove their children from class on the mere mention of the existence of LGBTQ+ people will stigmatize and harm other children in the class. LGBTQ+ children and families are not something anyone needs to be shielded from.
We are all human beings, making our way through this world together. Children need to learn about the complex and wonderful country we live in. Public schools, free and available to all children, are part of the foundation of our democracy.
Both the decision and the dissent include many references to my book Uncle Bobby’s Wedding. Writing for the majority, Justice Alito correctly states that the book celebrates the wedding of two people, and that many Americans agree with this. He then says that “other Americans may wish to present a different moral message to their children.”
I object to Justice Alito’s portrayal of my book as immoral. Same-sex marriage was legal in my state when I wrote Uncle Bobby’s Wedding 20 years ago, and it is legal in the entire U.S. now. My book shows that weddings are something families celebrate and that the members of a family love each other.
During the oral arguments in April, Justice Alito claimed that Chloe, the child in my book, is unhappy and confused because Uncle Bobby is marrying a man. Justice Sotomayor countered that Chloe is unhappy because she is worried that she will be losing her close relationship with her uncle.
As the author, I hereby confirm that Justice Sotomayor is correct. Uncle Bobby’s Wedding is a simple story about a family, in which a child fears that her beloved uncle Bobby will be spending less time with her after he gets married. The story would be identical if Bobby was marrying a woman.
In her dissent, Justice Sotomayor correctly says that the decision will create chaos in our nation’s public schools, harming both educators and students, and will allow a small minority of parents to dictate curriculum. She also states that, “Eliminating books depicting LGBTQ individuals as happily accepted by their families will not eliminate student exposure to that concept.”
I wrote Uncle Bobby’s Wedding about a happy extended family in which everyone, including the main character Chloe, loves their gay relative for who he is, without reservations. Surely this is a message that will harm no one and help many. I wish this kind of acceptance and joy for everyone in the LGBTQ+ community.”
“It’s disappointing that six of the Supreme Court justices, undoubtedly smart, well-read, and astute people, failed in basic reading comprehension when it comes to picture books, aimed at readers ages 4-8. … I am disappointed that the highest court in the land failed to find a middle ground, a way of balancing the importance of religious rights–which as a religious person, I understand and support–and the vital, life-saving importance of diverse and inclusive bookshelves, as well as the sovereignty of public education and school curricula.
I am disappointed that the highest court in the land left the door open not just for opt-outs for religious reasons to LGBTQ+ books but potentially for other concerns including, but not limited to, books depicting women working outside of the home, divorced parents, interracial couples, and interfaith couples. And it’s disappointing that the majority of the court failed to see what Justice Sotomayor noted in her dissent: that the language used in the majority opinion could be weaponized against LGBTQ+ teachers in the workplace…
I am disappointed that the highest court in the land failed to see a future where public education serves the greater good, instead of the bigoted views of a loud minority. …
Children deserve to learn about a world that is complex and beautiful, and wholly theirs, in age-appropriate ways, without ‘age-appropriate’ being a phrase weaponized against them and their learning capabilities.
Children deserve our trust in their ability to learn information that is sometimes in conflict with other information, and they deserve our protection from those who would want to deny them their right to exist in this world as their whole selves. …
We are failing our children if we limit their educational opportunities because of their parents’ belief systems because school is a place where minds are opened, not closed.
Mr. Rogers famously said, “My mum used to say, when the news is scary, look for the helpers.”
The fight for inclusive schools and inclusive teaching materials, including books, is not over. It’s only just begun. And we need everyone in this fight. We are the helpers. Our children need us now.”
Robin Stevenson, author of “Pride Puppy,” a charming children’s picture book about a puppy that gets lost at a Pride parade, put out a personal statement on her Instagram alongside the illustrator of the book, Julie McLaughlin. They say in part:
“Pride Puppy is a joyful alphabet book that was inspired by our own experiences of Pride parades and festivals, where families of all kinds come together to celebrate … We’ve heard from countless parents about how much it means to them and their kids to see people like themselves reflected in a book. All children deserve to see their families — and themselves — represented in the stories they read. … It is unreasonable and absurd to expect teachers to hide the existence of an entire group of people.”
“Religious liberty is essential. But hiding LGBTQ+ people is not free exercise of religion. It is oppression. School is where children learn how to disagree respectfully and to get along with people unlike themselves. Opt-outs teach children to separate themselves, to fear and reject those they disagree with. Opt-outs stigmatize LGBTQ+ children. I hope parents OPT OUT of opt-outs, so their children learn kindness and are prepared to engage with a diverse world. Justice Thomas suggested that schools ‘cabin’ LGBTQ+ representation into separate units to make opt-outs easier. But the Supreme Court already decided: SEPARATE IS NOT EQUAL.
Justice Alito wrote for the majority that our books are ‘coercive’ because they show LGBTQ+ JOY. Which is HUMAN JOY. Every child deserves books that honor their FULL HUMANITY. EVERYONE belongs at school. EVERYONE belongs in this world.”
More than 100 trans prisoners are reportedly missing, and presumed dead, after the infamous Evin prison in the Iranian capital city of Tehran was hit by Israeli airstrikes.
Situated in the Evin neighbourhood of north Tehran, Evin Prison was opened in 1972 and has a long and bloody history of human rights abuses, including beatings, torture, prolonged solitary confinement, sleep deprivation and sexual abuse, alongside poor conditions.
The prison is the main site for detaining the Islamic Republic’s political prisoners, journalists, academics and foreign citizens accused of spying – including dual-British-Iranian national Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe, human rights activist Narges Mohammadi and Australian academic Kylie Moore-Gilbert.
An exterior view of an office building of the Evin prison, which is destroyed in Israeli strikes in northern Tehran, Iran, on July 1, 2025. (Photo by Morteza Nikoubazl/NurPhoto via Getty Images)
The prison was struck during the 12-day war between Israel and Iran on 23 June, one day before the ceasefire
“According to official figures, 71 people were killed in the attack on Evin Prison,” judiciary spokesman Asghar Jahangir said some days later, confirming the number of casualties
Jahangir said the victims at Evin included administrative staff, guards, prisoners and visiting relatives as well as people living nearby.
As per reporting by The New York Times, Reza Shafakhah, a prominent human rights lawyer, said following the strike around 100 trans inmates are missing, with the authorities saying they are presumed dead after their part of the complex was destroyed.
Shafakhah added the Iranian government often treats being trans as a crime.
In Iran, changing your gender is legal but trans people still face significant social and political barriers, with transition only allowed on the basis a trans person receives surgery. There are no protections for trans people from hate crime or discrimination and being trans is treated as a mental illness.
You may like to watch
An interior view of a hospital in Evin prison, which is destroyed in Israeli strikes in northern Tehran, Iran, on July 1, 2025. (Photo by Morteza Nikoubazl/NurPhoto via Getty Images)
In 2019, Peace-Mark magazine published a quote reported to be by a trans inmate at Evin Prison. They said: “When you go to the Transgender Ward, you can’t even see the sunlight. The human body needs sunlight. If it’s not available, you need to take pills, but they don’t give us any.
“During my detention, except for the two times I was transferred to the infirmary with begging and pleading, I hadn’t seen the sunlight.”
The Wisconsin Supreme Court cleared the way Tuesday for the state to institute a ban on conversion therapy in a ruling that gives the governor more power over how state laws are enacted.
The court ruled that a Republican-controlled legislative committee’s rejection of a state agency rule that would ban the practice of conversion therapy for LGBTQ people was unconstitutional. The decision, which has a broad impact far beyond the conversion therapy issue, takes power away from the Legislature to block the enactment of rules by the governor’s office that carry the force of law.
The 4-3 ruling from the liberal-controlled court comes amid the national battle over LGBTQ+ rights. It is also part of a broader effort by the Democratic governor, who has vetoed Republican bills targeting transgender high school athletes, to rein in the power of the GOP-controlled Legislature.
What is conversion therapy?
What is known as conversion therapy is the scientifically discredited practice of using therapy to “convert” LGBTQ people to heterosexuality or traditional gender expectations.
The practice has been banned in 23 states and the District of Columbia, according to the Movement Advancement Project, an LGBTQ rights think tank. It is also banned in more than a dozen communities across Wisconsin. Since April 2024, the Wisconsin professional licensing board for therapists, counselors and social workers has labeled conversion therapy as unprofessional conduct.
Advocates seeking to ban the practice want to forbid mental health professionals in the state from counseling clients with the goal of changing their sexual orientation or gender identity.
The U.S. Supreme Court agreed in March to hear a Colorado case about whether state and local governments can enforce laws banning conversion therapy for LGBTQ+ children.
What is happening in Wisconsin?
The provision barring conversion therapy in Wisconsin has been blocked twice by the Legislature’s powerful Joint Committee for the Review of Administrative Rules — a Republican-controlled panel in charge of approving state agency regulations.
The Wisconsin Supreme Court ruling means the conversion therapy ban can be enacted. The court ruled that the legislative committee has been overreaching its authority in blocking a variety of other state regulations during Democratic Gov. Tony Evers’ administration.
The lawsuit brought by Evers targeted two votes by the joint committee. One deals with the Department of Safety and Professional Services’ conversion therapy ban. The other vote blocked an update to the state’s commercial building standards.
Republicans who supported suspending the conversion therapy ban have insisted the issue isn’t the policy itself, but whether the licensing board had the authority to take the action it did.
Evers has been trying since 2020 to get the ban enacted, but the Legislature has stopped it from going into effect.
Evers and legislative leaders did not immediately respond to messages seeking reaction to the ruling.
Ruling weakens legislative power
The Legislature’s attorney argued that decades of precedent backed up their argument, including a 1992 Wisconsin Supreme Court ruling upholding the Legislature’s right to suspend state agency rules.
Evers argued that by blocking the rule, the legislative committee is taking over powers that the state constitution assigns to the governor and exercising an unconstitutional “legislative veto.”
The Supreme Court on Tuesday agreed with Evers.
The court found that the Legislature was violating the state constitution’s requirement that any laws pass both houses of the Legislature and be presented to the governor.
Instead, in this case the Legislature was illegally taking “action that alters the legal rights and duties of the executive branch and the people of Wisconsin,” Chief Justice Jill Karofsky wrote for the majority. She was joined by the court’s three other liberal justices.
Conservative Justice Brian Hagedorn, in a dissent, said the court’s ruling is “devoid of legal analysis and raises more questions than it answers.”
Hagedorn argued for a more narrow ruling that would have only declared unconstitutional the legislative committee’s indefinite objection to a building code rule.
Fellow conservative justices Annette Ziegler and Rebecca Bradley also dissented, saying the ruling shifts too much power to the executive branch and holds the Legislature to a higher legal standard.
Bradley said the ruling “lets the executive branch exercise lawmaking power unfettered and unchecked.”
The issue goes beyond conversion therapy
The conversion therapy ban is one of several rules that have been blocked by the legislative committee. Others pertain to environmental regulations, vaccine requirements and public health protections.
Environmental groups hailed the ruling.
The decision will prevent a small number of lawmakers from blocking the enactment of environmental protections passed by the Legislature and signed into law, said Wilkin Gibart, executive director of Midwest Environmental Advocates.
The court previously sided with Evers in one issue brought in the lawsuit, ruling 6-1 last year that another legislative committee was illegally preventing the state Department of Natural Resources from funding grants to local governments and nongovernmental organizations for environmental projects under the Knowles-Nelson Stewardship Program.
Cutting Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits will disproportionately harm the LGBTQ+ community — and women and transgender people will bear the brunt of the changes.
About 15 percent of LGBTQ+ adults — nearly 2.1 million people, including 250,000 trans individuals and 1.3 million lesbian and bisexual women — received SNAP benefits in the past year, according to a new report by the Williams Institute, compared to 11 percent of non-LGBTQ+ adults.
SNAP is the largest anti-hunger program in the U.S., supporting over 42 million people monthly. The current Budget Reconciliation Bill, Donald Trump‘s so-called “Big Beautiful Bill,” would cause an estimated seven million people to either lose their SNAP benefits or see their benefits greatly reduced. It would also cut federal spending on Medicaid and the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) by more than $1 trillion over the next decade.
Almost 70 percent of LGBTQ+ adults who received SNAP benefits had household incomes under $35,000, 66 percent were living with a disability, and 49 percent had a child under 18 living in their household. Over 90 percent of LGBTQ+ adults who received SNAP were either currently working (42 percent), had worked in the past year (6 percent), were students (8 percent), homemakers (9 percent), retired (5 percent), or were unable to work (21 percent).
Parents with dependent children under 18 who receive SNAP benefits are currently exempt from working. The Budget Reconciliation Bill passed by Republicans in the House of Representatives would lower that age to seven, while the version passed by the Senate would lower the age to 14. The bill could also impact students who rely free school meals, who often qualify because their families qualify for food stamps.
“Research shows that LGBT adults and youth are at higher risk of food insecurity compared to non-LGBT people,” lead author Brad Sears, Distinguished Senior Scholar of Law and Policy at the Williams Institute, said in a statement. “Reducing SNAP benefits would disproportionately affect cisgender lesbian and bisexual women, transgender individuals, and LGBT people of color, who are more likely to face poverty and depend on food assistance.”
For those impacted by food insecurity, the LGBT Life Center offers free food pantries — “Pride Pantries” — at their locations. The Queer Food Foundationsalso provides assistance to Black queer and trans people.
