National
Obama campaign courts LGBT support
Donors large and small respond to marriage support
President Obama’s endorsement of marriage rights for same-sex couples has generated a wave of enthusiasm among LGBT people, and while many major donors maxed out their contributions to his campaign prior to the announcement, anecdotal evidence suggests an increase in smaller donations from LGBT supporters who might not be as politically engaged.
Andy Tobias, who’s gay and treasurer of the Democratic National Committee, said supporters had already made significant contributions to the campaign before Obama announced that he had completed his 19-month evolution on same-sex marriage. According to a report in The Advocate, Tobias has raised more than $500,000 as a bundler for the Obama campaign as of late last year.
“Recognizing how much is at stake, the community was already very generous,” Tobias said. “This just added to the enthusiasm.”
Kevin Jennings, who’s gay and formerly headed the Education Department’s Office of Safe and Drug-Free Schools, similarly said he saw only a few new donations after the president’s announcement, noting many Obama supporters had already given all they could. The Advocate report says Jennings raised between $50,000 and $100,000 for the campaign as of late last year.
“Because the president already had a strong record of accomplishment on LGBT issues, many of those who donated in 2008 … had already given (in many cases, the maximum amount) by the time of the president’s announcement,” Jennings said. “But I did see a number of new donors jump in — one who told me he gave online with tears running down his face — as well as folks who had not yet given the maximum, but had given something, add to what they had already given.”
Individuals can donate a maximum of $5,000 to a presidential campaign, which can be split between the primary and the general election. But donors can also contribute $30,800 a year to any given national committee and up to $10,000 a year to the “federal account” of state party committees.
Bruce Bastian, a gay Orem, Utah-based philanthropist known for giving to LGBT causes, said he couldn’t legally donate any more money to the Obama campaign after the president came out in support of same-sex marriage. Bastian was among the attendees at a $35,800-a-plate LGBT fundraiser for Obama that took place in D.C. in February and raised $1.4 million for the president.
“I have already contributed to Obama’s campaign as much as I can,” Bastian said. “I am very excited and pleased that the president came out in clear support of marriage equality for all Americans, but it didn’t change my mind in how I support him or to what extent I will support him. I think it is extremely important for the LGBT community to do everything we can to get Obama re-elected.”
The Obama campaign didn’t respond to a request for comment on how Obama’s support for same-sex marriage affected LGBT donations, but two weeks after the announcement on Wednesday, the campaign unveiled a new initiative, titled “Obama Pride: LGBT Americans for Obama,” which aims to integrate LGBT supporters into the campaign as Pride month approaches.
Obama Pride: LGBT Americans for Obama is set to launch with trainings, phone banks and house parties in a number of states including Pennsylvania, Colorado, Nevada and Michigan — which are seen as battleground states in the general election. As part of the effort, the campaign launched the website lgbt.barackobama.com.
Additionally, the White House is set to host a reception celebrating Pride month on June 15. The Obama administration has held Pride celebrations in each of the previous three years of his term. Obama traditionally speaks to attendees at the event, and will likely capitalize on his announcement in support of marriage equality as he addresses LGBT attendees.
While many major donors may have maxed out their contributions to the Obama campaign, anecdotal evidence suggests that Obama’s announcement in favor of same-sex marriage prompted individuals who tend to make smaller donations to open their wallets.
Tommy Rossman, a gay 39-year-old D.C. resident and human resources management systems coordinator, said he donated $100 to the Obama campaign after the president made the announcement, and had donated $300 to the campaign before Obama came out in support of same-sex marriage.
“Basically, I was just excited that he finally did it, and I wanted to make sure that since he took a risk politically to do it, that I’m doing my part to help him out as well,” Rossman said. “There are so many people — especially with progressives and with gays in general — that have really screamed loudly for him to do it and, again, I just want them to jump on board.”
Dan Ingram, 22, a gay Madison, Wis., health care software specialist, said he donated $30 one week after the announcement because he thought the move was politically courageous in the wake of the passage of a constitutional same-sex marriage ban in North Carolina and the failure of civil unions legislation in Colorado.
“It seems like the politically smart thing to do would have been to stick with his ‘evolution’ thing that he was pitching for a while, which, I think, a lot of liberal people took as code that he’s going to come out for it, but he’s waiting to get re-elected,” Ingram said. “With how those votes went, that might have still been the politically safer bet to make, so, for me, it was a really principled move by him to say that.”
Ingram said he’d donated multiple times to the president’s 2008 campaign, but his donation this month marks the first time he gave to Obama’s re-election bid.
David Wells, a gay 47-year-old D.C. resident and a self-employed software consultant, said he donated $100 to the president about 10 minutes after he endorsed same-sex marriage.
“Over the course of his first term, I kind of felt like he wasn’t doing anything, and lately he’s been coming back around to the LGBT community,” Wells said. “When he finally came out for this, I was like, ‘OK, I’m back in.'”
Other LGBT supporters of Obama have launched larger efforts to encourage other LGBT donors to give to the campaign. Lane Hudson, a gay D.C. Democratic activist, set up a page on the Obama campaign’s website and made an initial contribution of $500. The page had raised $10,000 within 24 hours of the president’s announcement. As of Wednesday, the page had raised $13,088 for the campaign.
“For me, it was a game changer because people like me have spent the last three-and-a-half years — and also the year before during the campaign — to make the case that it was important for our political leaders to court full civil equality,” Hudson said. “That’s what happened when he made this announcement. It really completed an evolution to a position that we need to get all people in all public office to hold.”
CLARIFICATION: The article has been updated to state more clearly that the reason Bruce Bastian couldn’t donate any more to Obama’s campaign is because he’s already reached the legal limit.
New York
Judge blocks DOJ from obtaining transgender patients’ medical records
Advocacy groups sued White House
A judge for the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York has granted a request from multiple transgender people for a temporary restraining order, blocking the disclosure of plaintiffs’ and class members’ medical information to the Justice Department.
Judge Katherine Polk Failla approved the Temporary Restraining Order and Provisional Class Certification, preventing any further information from being provided to the Trump-led DOJ.
The medical data was requested through subpoenas issued by the Trump-Vance administration’s DOJ to multiple hospitals in New York City — most notably NYU Langone — which halted its Transgender Youth Health Program in May following a federal push to stop providing trans minors with gender-affirming care.
In May 2026, NYU Langone Hospitals received a subpoena from a federal grand jury in Fort Worth, Texas, demanding that the hospitals turn over the identities and sensitive health information of any patient who had received medical treatment for gender dysphoria while under the age of 18 at NYU Langone between January 2020 and May 2026.
Lambda Legal, the American Civil Liberties Union, and the New York Civil Liberties Union filed a lawsuit, “Coe, et al. v. Blanche, et al.,” against the Trump-Vance administration on behalf of three families with trans youth and two trans young adults who were minors when they began care, in June 2026.
The lawsuit requests a temporary restraining order blocking the DOJ from violating the patients’ constitutional privacy rights by obtaining identifying and sensitive health information as part of its investigation into unspecified health offenses. The DOJ issued subpoenas to NYU Langone and other similar healthcare institutions in New York City, including Mount Sinai, that provide or have provided gender-affirming medical care to trans minors. All plaintiffs have filed under pseudonyms to maintain their privacy and anonymity.
Multiple leaders of organizations that helped push for the restraining order provided quotes about the ongoing situation and what it means for the fight for trans children’s access to healthcare in the U.S.
“Today’s order from the court is a victory for the basic privacy of our clients and all families like theirs across New York City. It is no secret that this administration will use every lever in its power to attack transgender people and fulfill its misguided goal to ‘end’ gender-affirming medical care — care that is legal and protected in New York State. Using subpoenas to attain the identities and sensitive health information of transgender young people to effectuate such goals should send chills down the spine of every American. Our laws and our Constitution recognize that we all have a right to confidentiality about the most intimate and private information about ourselves,” said Omar Gonzalez-Pagan, senior counsel and health care strategist at Lambda Legal. “Whether a young person receives any type of medical care is a decision for that patient, their family, and their doctor, not for political appointees to decide, interfere with, or know. The government cannot abuse its powers to violate the constitutional rights of transgender young people and their families. It is an enormous relief for these families that the court has stopped them from doing so as this case proceeds.”
“We’re thankful the court has granted our emergency request to protect the privacy interests of transgender New Yorkers and their families,” said Chase Strangio, co-director of the ACLU’s LGBTQ & HIV Rights Project. “Patients and families trust their doctors with their most intimate, private information and should trust in turn that this information will be protected from impermissible and harassing demands for disclosure from the federal government or anyone else. For the past year, the Trump administration has not only decided that it knows better than these families and their doctors what their medical needs are, but has also sought to obtain troves of sensitive information about patients in New York. We will continue to fight on behalf of these families and the fundamental liberty of all transgender New Yorkers and those who come here to seek needed medical care.”
“New York’s laws recognize that transgender youth deserve fundamental privacy protections for their sensitive medical records and unobstructed access to the care they need,” said Bobby Hodgson, deputy legal director at the New York Civil Liberties Union. “As the Trump administration tries to bully transgender youth, scare families, and intimidate healthcare providers into dropping their patients, we’re thankful the court found these tactics are likely unconstitutional and put a stop to them here in New York.”
Federal Government
Trump holds housing bill hostage to anti-trans SAVE Act
President’s SAVE Act failed in the Senate
President Donald Trump is refusing to sign a new bipartisan housing bill unless his SAVE Act is approved by the legislative branch.
The bill being prevented from being enacted into law is the “21st Century ROAD to Housing Act.” The legislation is an attempt by Congress to make buying a home in the U.S. Senate more affordable in response to various factors — including housing shortages and regulatory constraints — that have made homeownership increasingly difficult. The total number of homeowners has nearly stopped growing, with high interest rates and surging home prices pushing more Americans toward renting.
The housing bill was considered highly bipartisan, something that is rare in this Congress. The House voted to pass the bill 358-32 on Tuesday after the Senate approved the measure 85-5 a day earlier. The legislation was led by U.S. Sens. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Tim Scott (R-S.C.) in the Senate and U.S. Reps. Maxine Waters (D-Calif.) and French Hill (R-Ark.) in the U.S. House of Representatives.
Some of the highlights of the legislation are aimed at increasing the supply of affordable housing while making homeownership more accessible. The bill would streamline environmental reviews and direct the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development to provide guidance to communities on reforming zoning and land-use policies that can create barriers to housing development.
The legislation would also expand the definition of “manufactured housing,” making it cheaper and easier to mass-produce homes built in factories before being transported to their sites. To encourage additional development, the bill would provide grants and loans for the construction of new housing, the rehabilitation of aging properties, and the conversion of vacant buildings into residential units. It would also increase certain banks’ Public Welfare Investment cap, allowing them to direct more capital toward low-income and affordable housing projects.
In an effort to help more Americans purchase homes, the legislation would create a program to expand access to small-dollar mortgages, which are often used to finance lower-cost homes, while also seeking to improve housing opportunities for veterans. The bill would further promote homeownership by limiting the number of single-family homes that large institutional investors can own and requiring them to disclose how many such properties they control, a measure intended to prioritize American families over corporate buyers.
The bill the president wants enacted — the SAVE Act — is a restrictive and anti-transgender piece of proposed legislation.
The bill would impose a number of new limitations on voter registration across the country by amending the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 to require in-person proof of citizenship for anyone seeking to vote in U.S. elections. The bill would also limit acceptable forms of identification to documents such as a birth certificate or passport — records that the Brennan Center for Justice estimates more than 21 million Americans do not possess — effectively restricting access to the ballot. It would also ban online voter registration, DMV voter registration efforts, and mail-in voter registration.
Trump pushed for the SAVE Act to include a provision that would ban gender-affirming medical care for trans minors, even with parental consent, and prohibit trans people from participating in school or professional sports consistent with their gender identity rather than their sex assigned at birth.
Trump also pressed Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) to eliminate the filibuster so the Republican-controlled Congress could pass the SAVE Act, saying Republicans will never win another election without it.
It is expected that Congress will override the president’s veto and pass the 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act, as it requires a two-thirds supermajority vote in both the House of Representatives and the Senate — a threshold the legislation currently exceeds.
It is not expected that the SAVE Act will pass the Senate in its current form. It passed the House, but every Democrat and four Republicans voted against it in the Senate.
New York
N.Y. governor’s race presents stark contrast on LGBTQ rights
Democratic Gov. Kathy Hochul expected to face Republican Bruce Blakeman
As states across the country grapple with a rapidly changing federal landscape under President Donald Trump, governors have increasingly become the first line of defense — or enforcement — on issues ranging from healthcare and education to LGBTQ rights.
Nowhere is that more apparent than in New York, Trump’s home state, where the 2026 gubernatorial race is shaping up as a high-profile battle over the future of LGBTQ protections.
Incumbent Democratic Gov. Kathy Hochul is seeking a second full term as New York’s 57th governor and the state’s first female governor. She enters the race with strong support from LGBTQ advocates and organizations, including an endorsement from the Stonewall Democrats of New York City. Earlier this year, Hochul was also endorsed by progressive leaders like New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani and U.S. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. She is running alongside New York City Council Speaker Adrienne Adams as her lieutenant governor candidate.
Throughout her tenure, Hochul has signed a series of measures aimed at strengthening protections for LGBTQ New Yorkers, particularly transgender residents.
Among the most notable is New York’s “Trans Safe Haven Act,” which protects out-of-state trans youth, their parents, and medical providers who travel to New York to access legally protected gender-affirming care. Hochul has also signed legislation requiring health insurance plans to cover HIV prevention medications, including PrEP and Post-Exposure Prophylaxis (PEP), without out-of-pocket costs.
Additionally, Hochul signed a Long-Term Care Bill of Rights that prohibits discrimination against LGBTQ seniors and people living with HIV in long-term care facilities.
“As the birthplace of the LGBTQ+ rights movement, New York has long been at the forefront of advancing equality,” Hochul said in a statement during Pride month. “During Pride month, we celebrate New York’s vibrant LGBTQ+ community and acknowledge the importance of protecting the rights and freedoms of LGBTQ+ New Yorkers. This month and every month, we proudly stand with the LGBTQ+ community and remain committed to building a more inclusive and equitable future for all where everyone can live freely with dignity, safety, and respect.”
On the Republican side, Nassau County Executive Bruce Blakeman has emerged as the party’s leading candidate. Blakeman is running with Madison County Sheriff Todd Hood as his lieutenant governor pick.
Blakeman, Nassau County’s 10th county executive, was first elected in 2021 after defeating Democratic incumbent Laura Curran. He previously served as a commissioner of the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, a Nassau County legislator, and a Hempstead town councilman.
A longtime supporter of Trump, Blakeman appeared alongside the president during a 2024 event honoring slain NYPD Officer Jonathan Diller.
LGBTQ advocates have frequently criticized Blakeman for his positions on trans issues, particularly his opposition to trans women participating in women’s sports.
In February 2024, Blakeman signed an executive order barring women’s sports teams that include trans women from using Nassau County athletic facilities. The policy applies to youth, collegiate, and professional teams. Teams that include trans men were not affected. The order has since been halted by the New York State Appellate Division swiftly issued an injunction halting enforcement while the plaintiffs appeal the decision
Ahead of announcing the order, Blakeman repeatedly referred to trans women as “biological males” and argued they should compete on men’s or co-ed teams. LGBTQ rights groups condemned the policy, saying it discriminates against trans athletes and contributes to the marginalization of trans youth.
Trump endorsed Blakeman’s gubernatorial campaign in December 2025, shortly after U.S. Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.) announced she would not seek the Republican nomination. The president made his endorsement via Truth Social that “Bruce is MAGA all the way, and has been with me from the very beginning.”
The Washington Blade contacted Blakeman’s campaign seeking comment on his LGBTQ policy priorities and views on issues including nondiscrimination protections, trans rights, and healthcare access. The campaign did not respond.
The race highlights two sharply different approaches to LGBTQ policy in a state widely regarded as the birthplace of the modern LGBTQ rights movement, home to the 1969 Stonewall uprising that helped launch the contemporary movement for LGBTQ equality.
Despite the ideological contrast, early polling suggests Hochul remains the clear favorite. Most public surveys show the incumbent holding a double-digit advantage over her potential Republican challengers, with some polls placing her lead at roughly 20 percentage points ahead of the November election.

