National
Right-wing media watchdog project launched
Equality Matters created by gay ex-conservative David Brock
Former Clinton administration official Richard Socarides will head the newly created Equality Matters. (Photo courtesy Equality Matters)
Gay former conservative strategist and author David Brock, who changed sides in 2002 to become a champion of LGBT equality and progressive causes, announced the founding this week of a new initiative aimed at exposing “right-wing bigotry and homophobia wherever we find it.”
Brock said the new entity, Equality Matters, would be an arm of the progressive-leaning media watchdog group he founded in 2004 called Media Matters.
A statement released Monday says New York gay attorney and former Clinton administration official Richard Socarides would serve as president of Equality Matters. Lesbian journalist and Washington correspondent for The Advocate, Kerry Eleveld, was named editor of the project’s website, EqualityMatters.org, which organizers say will provide “news, opinion, and messaging” on LGBT-related issues in the media.
“Despite huge progress in gay rights in recent years, exemplified by the historic vote [on Dec. 18] finally striking down the ban on gay men and women from serving in the military, we are now living through a period of ferocious fundamentalism in the Republican Party and the conservative movement,” Brock said.
“Traditional conservatives and the Tea Party movement are united only in their contempt for equal rights for all Americans and a desire to return America to a 19th century idyll,” he said. “Equality Matters will not allow these latter-day ‘clerics’ to gain serious recognition by the media nor influence the policies that affect the lives of every American.”
A source familiar with Media Matters said the group and an affiliated entity, Media Matters Action network, raised about $23 million in 2010 in cash contributions and “long term commitments for 2011 and 2012.”
The New York Times reported that much of Media Matters’ funding comes from large contributions by wealthy liberal donors, including gay philanthropists.
The Blade source, who spoke on condition of not being identified, said the two entities yielded between $13 million and $14 in revenue this year. The 2010 figure disclosed by the source represents a significant boost in Media Matters’ revenue of $6.7 million in 2009 and $8.09 million raised in 2008, according to reports the group filed with the IRS in 2008 and 2009.
Socarides told the Blade Tuesday that Equality Matters would not have a separate budget and instead would operate under the Media Matters budget. He said Equality Matters, which would be based in the same offices as Media Matters at 455 Massachusetts Ave., N.W., would operate initially with a six-person staff, including him and Eleveld.
“We will draw on the Media Matters staff extensively,” he said. “And there are just under 100 people who work there. So we’ll have six people dedicated to just this and then parts of 95 others.”
According to Socarides, Equality Matters will not be involved in direct lobbying and won’t make campaign contributions – unlike existing LGBT groups like the Human Rights Campaign and the National Gay & Lesbian Task Force.
“Much like Media Matters already does on a broad range of issues, we will do news and information media monitoring,” he said. “And we’ll be a rapid response to any homophobic misinformation in the media or in political discourse. So part of our mission is to respond rapidly with smart and accurate information when the right wing – be it in media or politics – puts out misinformation.”
At least two activists involved with national LGBT groups said the launching of Equality Matters would likely trigger speculation among LGBT movement insiders about whether Brock and Socarides were seeking to step into the realm of other national LGBT groups that came under some criticism in the past year.
Expectations were high in January 2009 for significant progress on LGBT-related legislation as President Obama entered the White House and Democrats were in control of Congress, the two activists said. Although Congress passed an important hate crimes law last year with protections for LGBT people and last week repealed “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” all other important bills remain stalled in committee. Among them is the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, or ENDA, which calls for banning employment discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity.
“The feeling among some of us is the established groups could have done more and could have put more pressure on the Democrats to do more,” said one of the activists.
But others, including gay U.S. Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.), considered one of the leading advocates for LGBT rights in Congress, have said there were not enough LGBT-supportive votes in Congress to advance the other bills. Frank has said it is up to LGBT advocates to do the lobbying and advocacy work in the sections of the country, especially the so-called “red states,” where members of Congress oppose LGBT equality and won’t vote for pro-gay bills.
Socarides said he sees Equality Matters as a new force that will work with the existing groups, including the Human Rights Campaign and Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD), which also specializes in media-related initiatives.
One gay activist, who spoke on condition of anonymity, questioned whether Equality Matters would be replicating the work of existing groups.
“Media Matters is fantastic at pushing back at conservative disinformation, and if they’re ramping up that function in the gay space, God bless,” the activist said. “But if they’re doing policy advocacy, plenty of people with vastly more substantive experience than Socarides are doing that pretty well, as the passage of DADT suggests. It’s not clear this isn’t a completely redundant vanity project, but I guess we’ll see.”
GLAAD, which has a budget of $7.95 million and a 48-member staff located in New York and Los Angeles, focuses on the positive portrayal of LGBT people in the media and in entertainment, according to its president, Jarrett Barrios.
“GLAAD fights defamation in the media from major outlets to small markets around the country,” Barrios said. “Some of GLAAD’s most visible work is in Hollywood, but much of our work is with journalists and news organizations to ensure accurate and responsible coverage of LGBT peoples’ lives and the issues that affect them.”
He said that unlike Equality Matters’ stated objective, GLAAD steers clear of addressing specific political and policy-making issues.
“I think our effort will be complimentary rather than overlapping with GLAAD,” said Socarides. “And in fact one of our core missions at Media Matters and at Equality Matters is to help other progressive and LGBT rights organizations fulfill their own missions.”
Now that “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” has been addressed legislatively, Socarides said Equality Matters plans to devote much of its resources to promoting same-sex marriage equality, both on the national and state level. He said the group would jump into the media fray as ballot measures seeking to ban same-sex marriage surface in the states.
He said Equality Matters would also push to advance legislation stalled in Congress to overturn the Defense of Marriage Act, which defines marriage under federal law as a union only between a man and a woman and bars all federal programs – including Social Security benefits – for same-sex married couples.
“Despite our best efforts over the years to stiffen the spines of progressives in the face of unrelenting smears from the Republican attack machine, fearful progressives continue to cede the political field to right-wingers who are waging war against core American values,” Brock said in a statement. “We need to do more. Our new communication war room for gay equality, Equality Matters, will expose right-wing bigotry and homophobia wherever we find it, show that the real political vulnerability on these issues belongs to the GOP, provide desperately needed ballast in the media, and trigger progressive passion – so that our political leaders act on their convictions and fight for them,” he said.
Federal Government
Inside the LGBTQ records of Todd Blanche and Markwayne Mullin
Two men are acting attorney general, DHS secretary
President Donald Trump became famous for his use of the phrase “You’re fired!” while hosting the reality TV show “The Apprentice” in the early 2000s. However, during his time in the Oval Office, he has attempted to distance himself from that image.
Despite those efforts, the phrase once again comes to mind as Trump has fired two high-level female Cabinet members within the past month: Pam Bondi and Kristi Noem.
Their replacements — Todd Blanche at the Justice Department and Markwayne Mullin at the Department of Homeland Security — bring records that, while different in depth, both reflect limited support for LGBTQ protections and, in some cases, direct opposition.
Todd Blanche
Acting attorney general
Little has been found regarding Todd Blanche’s LGBTQ history prior to his role as acting head of the Department of Justice. Unlike those who have worked within the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division or served as state attorneys general, he has not developed a public-facing legal ideology on LGBTQ issues.
Blanche attended American University for his undergraduate studies — like fellow Trump attorney Michael Cohen — where he met his future wife, Kristin, who was studying at nearby Catholic University in D.C.
He began his legal career as an intern at the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Washington, which eventually became a full-time position. He later worked as a paralegal in the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York while attending Brooklyn Law School at night. Blanche graduated cum laude in 2003. He and his wife later married and had two children.
Blanche left the U.S. attorney’s office in 2014, taking a job in the Manhattan office of the law firm WilmerHale. In September 2017, he moved to Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft LLP, where he was a partner in the White Collar Defense and Investigations practice.
In his personal capacity, he represented several figures associated with Donald Trump and former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani, including Trump’s former campaign manager Paul Manafort, businessman Igor Fruman, and attorney Boris Epshteyn.
In 2024, Blanche switched from Democrat to Republican, aligning himself with Trump’s political orbit. He later served as Trump’s personal defense attorney in the New York State case that led to Trump’s 2024 conviction on 34 felony counts of falsifying business records to cover up hush-money payments to bisexual adult film star Stormy Daniels.
Now the highest-ranking official at the Justice Department, Blanche has played a central role in overseeing the department and has been involved in leadership decisions tied to several controversial actions affecting LGBTQ people.
In a letter to New York Attorney General Letitia James, Blanche declared that the Justice Department “will not sit idly by while you attempt to use your office to force harmful procedures on our most vulnerable population,” if legal action were taken against NYU Langone. The hospital had “permanently” ended a program earlier that month after the Trump-Vance administration threatened to pull all federal funding if it continued prescribing puberty blockers and hormones to minors.
Blanche wrote that “the Justice Department believes the law is clear, and anti-discrimination laws cannot be used to force NYU Langone to perform sex-rejecting procedures on children.”
“As just one example, your office’s position would require a hospital to prescribe certain medications for certain diagnoses, regardless of the hospital’s or its doctors’ independent medical determination about the propriety of such treatment,” he said.
Blanche also echoed his predecessor’s public stance on limiting LGBTQ-related protections at the federal level, aligning with Bondi’s sentiments in June 2025 regarding the U.S. Supreme Court’s 6–3 decision that restricted LGBTQ history lessions in schools and limits lower federal courts from issuing nationwide injunctions — rulings that have often blocked Trump administration policies.
Calling it “another great decision that came down today,” Blanche argued that the ruling “restores parents’ rights to decide their child’s education,” adding: “It seems like a basic idea, but it took the Supreme Court to set the record straight, and we thank them for that. And now that ruling allows parents to opt out of dangerous trans ideology and make the decisions for their children that they believe is correct.”
In December 2025, a Justice Department memo stated that, “effective immediately,” prisons and jails would no longer be held responsible for violations of standards meant to protect LGBTQ people from harassment, abuse, and rape under the Prison Rape Elimination Act. The law, passed unanimously by Congress in 2003, requires that incarcerated people be screened for their risk of sexual assault, including consideration of LGBTQ status, and applies to all correctional facilities.
Additionally, when the Justice Department, under Blanche’s deputy leadership and at Trump’s behest, attempted to force Children’s National Hospital in D.C. to turn over medical records related to gender-affirming care, U.S. District Judge Julie R. Rubin ruled that the effort “appears to have no purpose other than to intimidate and harass.”
Blanche is also described as having a “strong belief in executive authority.”
Markwayne Mullin
Secretary of Homeland Security
While Blanche’s record is defined more by recent actions than a long paper trail, Markwayne Mullin brings a more established history on LGBTQ issues from his time in Congress.
The head of the Department of Homeland Security has served in Congress since 2013, in both the U.S. House of Representatives and U.S. Senate. He has been actively engaged in shaping restrictions and aligns with broader cultural rhetoric that frames anti-LGBTQ speech as protected expression.
In May 2016, Mullin criticized the Department of Education and the Justice Department’s “Dear Colleague” letter on transgender students, arguing that trans girls should not use girls’ restrooms in public schools.
By January 2021, Mullin and then-Hawaii Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard had introduced a bill to prevent trans women from participating in women’s sports.
Mullin was not recorded as voting on the final passage of the Respect for Marriage Act, which codified federal recognition of same-sex and interracial marriage.
In 2023, Mullin received a rating of just 6 percent from the Human Rights Campaign.
While serving in the Senate and as a member of the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) Committee, Mullin has been a vocal critic of policies aimed at expanding LGBTQ inclusion in federal programs. He has participated in broader Republican efforts questioning equity-based implementation of the Older Americans Act, including guidance related to sexual orientation and gender identity in aging services, arguing such policies could have unintended consequences.
Mullin also makes history as the first Native American — and a citizen of the Cherokee Nation — to lead the Department of Homeland Security.
He was among the 147 Republicans who voted to overturn the 2020 presidential election results despite no evidence of widespread fraud, and was present in the House on Jan. 6.
Noticias en Español
La X vuelve al tribunal
Primer Circuito examina caso del reconocimiento de personas no binarias en Puerto Rico
Hace ocho meses escribí sobre este tema cuando todavía no había llegado al nivel judicial en el que se encuentra hoy. En ese momento, la discusión se movía entre decisiones administrativas, debates públicos y resistencias políticas. No era un asunto cerrado, pero tampoco había alcanzado el punto actual.
Hoy el escenario es distinto.
La organización Lambda Legal compareció ante el Tribunal de Apelaciones del Primer Circuito en Boston para solicitar que se confirme una decisión que obliga al gobierno de Puerto Rico a emitir certificados de nacimiento que reflejen la identidad de las personas no binarias. La apelación se produce luego de que un tribunal de distrito concluyera que negar esa posibilidad constituye una violación a la Constitución de Estados Unidos.
Este elemento marca la diferencia. Ya no se trata de una discusión conceptual. Existe una determinación judicial que identificó un trato desigual.
El planteamiento de la parte demandante se sostiene en el propio marco legal vigente en Puerto Rico. Los certificados de nacimiento de identidad no son registros históricos inmutables. Son documentos utilizados para fines actuales y esenciales. Permiten acceder a empleo, educación y servicios, y son requeridos en múltiples gestiones ante el Estado. Su función es operativa.
En ese contexto, la exclusión de las personas no binarias no responde a una limitación jurídica. Puerto Rico permite la corrección de marcadores de género en certificados de nacimiento para personas trans binarias desde el caso Arroyo González v. Rosselló Nevares. Además, el Código Civil reconoce la existencia de certificados que reflejan la identidad de la persona más allá del registro original.
La diferencia radica en la aplicación.
El reconocimiento se concede dentro de categorías específicas, mientras que se excluye a quienes no se identifican dentro de ese esquema. Esa exclusión es el eje de la controversia actual.
El argumento presentado por Lambda Legal es preciso. Obligar a una persona a utilizar documentos que no reflejan su identidad implica someterla a una representación incorrecta en procesos fundamentales de la vida cotidiana. Esto puede generar dificultades prácticas, exposición innecesaria y situaciones de vulnerabilidad.
Las personas demandantes, nacidas en Puerto Rico, han planteado que el acceso a documentos precisos no es una cuestión simbólica, sino una necesidad básica para poder desenvolverse sin contradicciones impuestas por el propio Estado.
El hecho de que este caso se encuentre en el sistema federal introduce una dimensión adicional. No se trata de un proyecto legislativo ni de una política pública en discusión. Es una controversia constitucional. El análisis gira en torno a derechos y a la aplicación equitativa de las leyes.
Este proceso tampoco ocurre en aislamiento.
Se desarrolla en un contexto donde los debates sobre identidad y derechos han estado marcados por una mayor presencia de posturas conservadoras en la esfera pública, tanto en Estados Unidos como en Puerto Rico. En el ámbito local, esa influencia ha sido visible en discusiones legislativas recientes, donde argumentos de carácter religioso han comenzado a formar parte del debate sobre política pública. Esa intersección introduce tensiones en torno a la separación entre iglesia y Estado y tiene efectos concretos en el acceso a derechos.
Señalar este contexto no implica cuestionar la fe ni la práctica religiosa. Implica reconocer que, cuando determinados argumentos se trasladan al ejercicio del poder público, pueden incidir en decisiones que afectan a sectores específicos de la población.
Desde Puerto Rico, esta situación no se observa a distancia. Se experimenta en la práctica diaria. En la necesidad de presentar documentos que no corresponden con la identidad de quien los porta. En las implicaciones que esto tiene en espacios laborales, educativos y administrativos.
El avance de este caso abre una posibilidad de cambio en el marco legal aplicable. No porque resuelva de inmediato todas las tensiones en torno al tema, sino porque establece un punto de análisis jurídico sobre una práctica que hasta ahora ha operado bajo criterios restrictivos.
A diferencia de hace ocho meses, el escenario actual incluye una determinación judicial que ya identificó una violación de derechos. Lo que corresponde ahora es evaluar si esa determinación se sostiene en una instancia superior.
Ese proceso no define un resultado inmediato, pero sí establece un nuevo punto de referencia.
El debate ya no es teórico.
Ahora es judicial.
New York
Court orders Pride flag to return to Stonewall
Lambda Legal, Washington Litigation Group filed federal lawsuit
The Pride flag will once again fly over the Stonewall National Monument in New York following a court order requiring the National Park Service to raise it over the site.
The decision follows a lawsuit filed by Lambda Legal and the Washington Litigation Group in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, which challenged the removal as unconstitutional under the Administrative Procedure Act and argued that the government unlawfully targeted the LGBTQ community.
In February, the NPS removed the Pride flag from the Stonewall National Monument, the first national monument dedicated to LGBTQ rights and history in the U.S. The move followed a Jan. 21 memorandum issued by President Donald Trump-appointed NPS Director Jessica Bowron restricting which flags may be flown at national parks. The directive limited displays to official government flags, with narrow exceptions for those deemed to serve an “official purpose.”
Plaintiffs successfully argued that the Pride flag meets that standard, given Stonewall’s status as the birthplace of the modern LGBTQ rights movement. They also contended that the policy violated the APA by bypassing required public input and improperly applying agency rules.
The lawsuit named Interior Secretary Doug Burgum, Bowron, and Amy Sebring, superintendent of Manhattan sites for the NPS, as defendants. Plaintiffs included the Gilbert Baker Foundation, Village Preservation, Equality New York, and several individuals.
The court found that the memorandum — while allowing limited exceptions for historical context purposes — was applied unlawfully in this case. As part of the settlement, the NPS is required to rehang the Pride flag on the monument’s official flagpole within seven days, where it will remain permanently.
“The sudden, arbitrary, and capricious removal of the Pride flag from the Stonewall National Monument was yet another act by this administration to erase the LGBTQ+ community,” said Karen Loewy, co-counsel for plaintiffs and Lambda Legal’s Senior Counsel and Director of Constitutional Law Practice. “Today, the government has pledged to restore this important symbol back to where it belongs.”
“This is a complete victory for our clients and for the LGBTQ+ community,” said Alexander Kristofcak, lead counsel for plaintiffs and a lawyer with Washington Litigation Group. “The government has acknowledged what we argued from day one: the Pride flag belongs at Stonewall. The flag will be restored and it will fly officially and permanently. And we will remain vigilant to ensure that the government sticks to the deal.”
“Gilbert Baker created the Rainbow Pride flag as a symbol of hope and liberation,” said Charles Beal, president of the Gilbert Baker Foundation. “Today, that symbol is restored to the place where it belongs, standing watch over the birthplace of the modern LGBTQ+ rights movement.”
“The government tried to erase an important symbol of the LGBTQ+ community, and the community said no,” said Amanda Babine, executive director of Equality New York. “Today’s accomplishment proves that when we stand together and fight back, we win.”
“The removal of the Pride flag from Stonewall was an attempt to erase LGBTQ+ history and undermine the rule of law,” said Andrew Berman, executive director of Village Preservation. “This settlement restores both.”
With Loewy on the complaint are Douglas F. Curtis, Camilla B. Taylor, Omar Gonzalez-Pagan, Kenneth D. Upton Jr., Jennifer C. Pizer, and Nephetari Smith from Lambda Legal. With Kristofcak on the complaint are Mary L. Dohrmann, Sydney Foster, Kyle Freeny, James I. Pearce, and Nathaniel Zelinsky from Washington Litigation Group.
Lebanese LGBTQ group responds to latest war
Inside the LGBTQ records of Todd Blanche and Markwayne Mullin
PHOTOS: Denali at Pitchers
Whitman-Walker Health to present ‘Pro Bono Excellence’ award to law firm
La X vuelve al tribunal
HRC endorses Va. ballot initiative to redraw congressional districts
BLUF leather social set for April 10 in Rehoboth
The emperor has no clothes: how rhetoric fuels repression in Eswatini
LGBTQ community explores arming up during heated political times
Celebrations of life planned for Sean Bartel
-
2026 Midterm Elections4 days agoHRC endorses Va. ballot initiative to redraw congressional districts
-
Rehoboth Beach4 days ago
BLUF leather social set for April 10 in Rehoboth
-
Eswatini4 days ago
The emperor has no clothes: how rhetoric fuels repression in Eswatini
-
National4 days ago
LGBTQ community explores arming up during heated political times
