News
Will Trump, gov’t agencies recognize Pride month?
Would be first GOP president to issue such a proclamation

Will President Trump recognize June as Pride month? (C-Span image)
Picture it: President Trump enters the East Room of the White House on a warm D.C. day in June to the sound of cheers from adoring members of the LGBT community holding up their iPhones to document the occasion with videos and photos.
With his daughter Ivanka Trump and son-in-law Jared Kushner at his side, Trump welcomes guests and commemorates June as Pride month by recognizing the LGBT community’s accomplishments in recent years.
Having trouble with this image? It could be because of the anti-LGBT positions and actions Trump and his administration have taken or perhaps because such an event would anger anti-LGBT groups that supported his election. It could be because instead of cheering him, LGBT people angered by his policies would boo Trump out of the room.
It might also be because recent reports Trump may have abused executive power or committed obstruction of justice raise questions about whether Trump will even be president in June.
Assuming Trump remains in office, it remains to be seen what steps he’ll take, if any, to recognize June as Pride month. Kelly Love, a White House spokesperson, said via email when asked if Trump would issue a Pride proclamation or host a White House Pride reception, “We will let you know as soon as we announce our June proclamations.”
During the 2016 election, Trump in an interview with ABC News’ Jonathan Karl said he’d “look into” whether he could issue a proclamation as president recognizing June as Pride month, essentially dodging the question.
“I would look into it,” Trump said. “And I feel so badly what happened [in Orlando]. And we have to do something about it.”
President Clinton started the tradition of issuing a proclamation to recognize June as Pride month. Although President George W. Bush discontinued that tradition, it was renewed by President Obama, who also in each of his years in office held a White House reception to celebrate Pride with members of the LGBT community.
If Trump were to continue the recognition of June as Pride month with either a proclamation or a reception, he would be the first Republican president to do so. It would also be consistent with his claims during the presidential campaign that he’s a bigger friend to LGBT people than his opponent, Hillary Clinton.
Gregory Angelo, president of Log Cabin Republicans, said his group — largely alone among LGBT organizations that support and interact with the Trump administration — has proposed the idea of Trump recognizing Pride, but no commitments were made.
“The suggestion has been formally made to the White House,” Angelo said. “Conversations are ongoing. It’s too soon to comment further.”
Given Trump’s predilection for photo ops — such as the pictures he’s taken with business leaders and presidents of historically black colleges — one possibility for Trump recognizing Pride is a shot of him in the Oval Office with Angelo and high-profile LGBT people who supported him like Peter Thiel, Caitlyn Jenner or Ric Grenell.
It’s not just whether Trump will recognize Pride that remains in question. In years past, the affinity groups for LGBT workers at federal departments hosted Pride celebrations.
Some of those celebrations were newer than others. The Pride celebration at the Pentagon only came about after “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal in 2010, but celebrations at the U.S. Justice Department occurred even during the Bush administration and former U.S. Attorney General Michael Mukasey addressed LGBT employees in 2008. By the end of last year, virtually each of the departments had some kind of celebration.
Under the Obama administration, the heads of the departments were featured speakers at the Pride events and delivered remarks in solidarity with LGBT people. It’s certainly hard to imagine Attorney General Jeff Sessions addressing LGBT employees at the Justice Department.
The Washington Blade reached out to multiple affinity groups for LGBT federal workers, but — perhaps in a sign of fear of reprisal — they were largely silent on plans for Pride celebrations with June just a few weeks away. FedQ, the umbrella organization for the groups, didn’t respond to multiple requests for comment.
John Elias, president of DOJ Pride, was the only head of an LGBT affinity group to respond to the Blade’s request and would say only that plans are underway for some kind of Pride recognition.
“The Department’s LGBT Pride Month Observance Program is in the planning phase,” Elias said. “I expect the format will remain as it has been in recent years.”
Elias didn’t respond to a follow-up email on whether that meant Sessions would be invited to speak at the event and if he planned on attending as Eric Holder and Loretta Lynch did under the Obama administration.
UPDATE: After the initial publication of this article, a number of affinity for LGBT federal groups responded to affirm their agencies are set to hold events recognizing June as Pride month.
At the Small Business Administration, spokesperson Mark Gibson said, “Plans are currently underway but nothing is concrete as of yet.”
Rudy Reyns, president of DOD Pride, said an event would take place in Pentagon Center Courtyard on June 12 and Defense Secretary James Mattis has been invited to attend if his schedule allows.
A representative from HUD Glove said the group is planning four events to recognize June as Pride month. The group has invited HUD Secretary Ben Carson to speak, the representative said, although he hasn’t yet confirmed his attendance.
U.S. Military/Pentagon
Federal appeals court rules White House illegally banned trans troops
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth says Pentagon will appeal to SCOTUS
A panel of federal appeals court judges ruled that President Donald Trump’s policy banning transgender troops likely violates their constitutional rights.
The three-judge panel from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled 2-1 that Trump’s Executive Order 14183, also known as “Prioritizing Military Excellence and Readiness,” was created with the intent to exclude people from the military based on their gender identity.
The policy argues that trans people are inherently incapable of meeting the military’s “high standards of readiness, lethality, cohesion, honesty, humility, uniformity, and integrity,” citing a history of or signs of gender dysphoria as the cause. According to the Defense Department, this creates “medical, surgical, and mental health constraints on [an] individual.”
The policy states that, regardless of the physical or intellectual capabilities of each applicant, it views trans military applicants as a monolith, considering them less qualified than their cisgender peers.
Despite the panel’s majority opinion issued on Monday, the first day of Pride Month, the ban remains in effect. The U.S. Supreme Court allowed the Pentagon to enforce the policy last year and will continue to allow it to remain in place as litigation proceeds.
The panel’s new ruling will prevent the military from discharging current service members named in the lawsuit, but it does not allow new transrecruits to join.
The policy “appears to be driven by the bare desire to harm a politically unpopular group: persons who identify as transgender,” Judge Robert Wilkins, a Democratic appointee of President Barack Obama wrote for the majority.
Judge Justin Walker, the author of the dissenting opinion and a Republican Trump appointee, argued that the authority to determine military policy does not rest with the courts. Instead, he wrote, the Constitution grants that power to Congress through legislation and to the president as commander in chief of the armed forces.
“We have neither the expertise nor the authority to decide whether the military can exclude the plaintiffs from its ranks. The Constitution assigns that authority to Congress and the commander-in-chief,” Walker wrote.
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth indicated that an appeal is in the works, posting, “See you at SCOTUS” on X on Monday in response to the ruling.
Jennifer Levi, senior director of transgender and queer rights at GLAD Law, which has led the litigation since last November, applauded the decision.
“Today’s decision is a powerful vindication of the plaintiffs’ extraordinary courage and unwavering commitment to their country,” Levi said.
The Washington Blade spoke with Second Lt. Nicolas (Nic) Talbott of the U.S. Army, the lead plaintiff in the case, and Levi from GLAD Law back in November.
While discussing the case and his experiences as a trans service member, Talbott said his identity is an asset rather than a hindrance, particularly when it comes to identifying problems and finding solutions, regardless of what others may think or say.
“Being transgender is not some sad thing that people go through,” Talbott told the Blade. “This is something that has taken years and years and years of dedication and discipline and research and ups and downs to get to the point where I am today … my ability to transition was essential to getting me to that point where I am today.”
He also discussed the impact of removing qualified and dedicated service members from the military, arguing that the consequences will be felt long after Trump leaves office.
“When we’re losing thousands of those qualified, experienced individuals … those are seats that are not just going to be able to be filled by anybody,” he said. “[That’s] military training that’s not going to be able to be replaced for years and years to come.”
“Every person who puts on the uniform is expected to make a tremendous amount of sacrifice,” Talbott said. “Who I am under this uniform should have no bearing on that … We shouldn’t be picking and choosing which veterans are worthy of our thanks on that day.”
Levi characterized the policy as overtly cruel and legally indefensible to the Blade.
“This policy and its rollout is even more cruel than the first in a number of ways,” Levi explained. “For one, the policy itself says that transgender people are dishonest, untrustworthy and undisciplined, which is deeply offensive and degrading and demeaning.”
She also argued that the administration’s cost justification is flawed, saying that removing and replacing trans service members is more expensive than retaining them.
“There’s no legitimate justification relating to cost … it is far more expensive to both purge the military of people who are serving and also to replace people … than to provide the minuscule amount of costs for medications other service members routinely get.”
National
Results from key Tuesday primary races
State officials in California had not called the governor’s race as of Wednesday morning but Republican Steve Hilton and Democrat Xavier Becerra appear likely to advance to the general election.
The race for governor has been scrambled several times after Kamala Harris opted not to run, Rep. Eric Swalwell dropped out after sexual misconduct allegations surfaced, and Rep. Katie Porter’s campaign fizzled. Becerra would be the state’s first Latino governor since 1875 if elected. Hilton was endorsed by President Trump.
In the Los Angeles mayor’s race, the AP declared that incumbent Mayor Karen Bass will advance to the Nov. 3 runoff while former reality TV star Spencer Pratt and LA Council member Nithya Raman were competing for second place. California is notoriously slow in counting ballots and only about half of the results were available by Wednesday morning.
In San Francisco, Democratic State Sen. Scott Wiener advanced to the general election in November, besting Supervisor Connie Chan, who was endorsed by House Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi. Pelosi is retiring from Congress after nearly 40 years in the House.
In Iowa, Democratic state Rep. Josh Turek won the primary for an open U.S. Senate seat, defeating state Sen. Zach Wahls. Turek will face Rep. Ashley Hinson, who won the GOP primary with President Donald Trump’s endorsement, in the general election.
The Iowa seat is open because Sen. Joni Ernst (R) decided not to seek re-election. The primary was closely watched by LGBTQ advocates because Wahls rose to national prominence after a speech he made defending marriage equality went viral in 2011. Wahls was raised by a lesbian couple.
Congress
10 HIV/AIDS activists arrested on Capitol Hill
Protesters interrupted Secretary of State Marco Rubio during hearing
U.S. Capitol Police on Tuesday arrested 10 HIV/AIDS activists who protested Secretary of State Marco Rubio during a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing.
The activists from Housing Works, Health GAP, the Treatment Action Group, and ACT UP held signs and chanted “Rubio’s Cuts Kill People with AIDS, PEPFAR Saves Lives!” before officers removed them from Dirksen Senate Office Building room where the hearing took place.
A media advisory the Washington Blade received before the protest noted “mounting evidence of Rubio’s attempts to sabotage PEPFAR (the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, U.S. bilateral AIDS program) and vital global health programs.” The press release specifically highlighted three specific points:
• Eliminating Centers for Disease Control’s (CDC) lifesaving PEPFAR programs, which currently support approximately 12 million people on HIV treatment across 51 countries. Instead, Rubio intends to dismantle CDC’s current PEPFAR role and stamp out their global footprint in disease outbreak and surveillance for pandemics beyond HIV. Experts including eight former CDC Directors under Republican and Democratic administrations have spoken out against this effort to dismantle PEPFAR. Recent PEPFAR data showed sharp decreases in the numbers of people newly tested, diagnosed, and treated for HIV, but these data would have been even worse if not for CDC’s PEPFAR programs.
• Withholding $2 billion in Congressionally appropriated FY25 funding, including $330 million to combat HIV, $250 million to fight malaria, $320 million for maternal and child health programs, and nearly $650 million in global health security programs.
• Negotiating secret bilateral deals blackmailing African governments by demanding access to critical mineral wealth as a condition of access to HIV treatment and prevention funding.
The groups have staged several protests against the Trump-Vance administration’s HIV/AIDS policies since it took office.
Rubio on Jan. 28, 2025, issued a waiver that allowed PEPFAR and other “life-saving humanitarian assistance” programs to continue to operate during a freeze on nearly all U.S. foreign aid spending. HIV/AIDS service providers around the world with whom the Blade has spoken say PEPFAR cuts and the loss of funding from the U.S. Agency for International Development, which officially closed on July 1, 2025, has severely impacted their work.
The State Department last September announced PEPFAR will distribute lenacapavir in countries with high prevalence rates.
The New York Times last summer reported Vought “apportioned” only $2.9 billion of $6 billion that Congress set aside for PEPFAR for fiscal year 2025. (PEPFAR in the coming fiscal year will use funds allocated in fiscal year 2024.)
Bipartisan opposition in the U.S. Senate prompted the Trump-Vance administration last July withdraw a proposal to cut $400 million from PEPFAR’s budget. Vought a few weeks later said he would use a “pocket rescission” to cancel $4.9 billion for HIV/AIDS prevention and global health programs and other foreign aid assistance initiatives that Congress had already approved.
The White House in January expanded the global gag rule to ban U.S. foreign aid for groups that promote “gender ideology.” President Ronald Reagan in 1985 implemented the original regulation, also known as the “Mexico City” policy, which bans U.S. foreign aid for groups that support abortion and/or offer abortion-related services. Advocacy groups insist the expanded rule will adversely impact HIV prevention efforts around the world.
“Congress must stop Secretary Rubio before he dismantles PEPFAR,” said Treatment Action Group’s Kendall Martinez-Wright. “Rubio continues to defy the will of Congress and the American people who want this program restored and repaired. Under his leadership he is diverting funding and trying to eliminate the essential role of technical experts in global HIV and global health, while program performance is flailing.”
