Connect with us

News

Mattis claims (dubiously) Joint Chiefs had no input on trans service

Former defense secretary defines anti-trans restrictions he endorsed

Published

on

Defense Secretary James Mattis (Public domain photo by Navy Petty Officer 1st Class Kathryn E. Holm)

Former Defense Secretary James Mattis continues to defend the transgender military ban, making a dubious claim the military service chiefs had no input when openly transgender service was implemented during the Obama years.

Mattis made the remarks in an interview with Time Magazine on the publication of his book, “Call Sign Chaos” in response to a question about why he agreed to roll back policy allowing transgender people to serve in the military.

Although President Trump tweeted he’d ban transgender service members “in any capacity,” Mattis said the new policy was “not a roll back; it was a study.”

Mattis, in apparent reference to the six-month study he was carrying out on transgender service as Trump made the anti-trans tweets, said the policy he proposed “was absolutely a study” based on concerns he said the Joint Chiefs brought up with him.

The military service chiefs, Mattis said, brought up concerns about allowing transgender people into basic training and told him “we’re not ready.”

“I said, ‘What do you mean you’re not ready? Do you have any guidance on what the expectations are? Well, where was your input?’ Mattis said. “They said we didn’t have input.”

It should be noted that when Defense Secretary Ashton Carter announced in 2016 the military would lift the medical regulations banning transgender service and begin its policy of allowing openly transgender people into the armed forces, none of the military service chiefs were present at the news conference.

Mattis said he called for the study on transgender service because he didn’t want to sacrifice the readiness of the armed forces. (Transgender advocates would say the addition of an estimated 14,700 transgender people in the military enhances readiness.)

“I am not going to lose any military efficiency or effectiveness,” Mattis said. “And that’s why I called for a study. And then I just need to leave it there because it’s in courts right now and I shouldn’t be addressing things when I’m no longer privy to the ongoing discussions or where the policy is at.”

Mattis said he was couching his remarks because litigation challenging the transgender military ban remains pending. Although the U.S. Supreme Court essentially issued a green light allowing the Trump administration to implement the ban, the process of litigation continues in lower courts.

The study Mattis conducted resulted in his recommendation to restrict the military service of transgender people in a policy that essentially amounts to a ban. Although transgender people who came out under the Carter policy can remain in the armed forces, transgender people now face significant barriers in enlisting in the armed forces and those who are diagnosed at a later time are now discharged.

Aaron Belkin, director of the San Francisco-based Palm Center, said in a statement Mattis “continues to bury his head in the sand when the health and unity of the nation are at stake,” placing any blame on lack of readiness on the feet of the military service chiefs.

“When it comes to transgender military service, Secretary Mattis asserted falsely that the Service Chiefs had no input into how new transgender recruits would be integrated into basic training,” Belkin said. “In fact, the Chiefs were put in charge of applying transgender policy to the basic training environment, and they were given an entire year to figure it out. They didn’t do anything and then complained about it when the deadline came.”

Mattis’ remarks are similar to comments he gave in Senate testimony defending the transgender military ban in a moment when he clashed with Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.). At the time, Gillibrand had recently gotten all service chiefs on the record saying transgender service has resulted in no incidents of unit disruption, but Mattis insisted reports of that nature wouldn’t have reached them.

Referencing the favorable testimony the military service chiefs gave Gillibrand on transgender service, Belkin concludes Mattis continues to miss the mark.

“As he has on other issues, Mattis seems to want to have his status as a Trump critic without renouncing any of the Trump policies he put into practice,” Belkin said.

Mattis resigned as defense secretary under the Trump administration following an announcement from Trump he’d remove all U.S. soldiers from Syria, which was criticized as a hasty decision and influenced by Turkey President Recep Tayyip Erdogan. Trump has since reversed himself on that decision.

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

Federal Government

Senate Democrats press DOJ over anti-trans prison directives

Markey joins other lawmakers in demanding reversal of policies

Published

on

(Photo by Andrushko Galyna/Bigstock)

U.S. Sen. Edward Markey (D-Mass.) is urging acting Attorney General Todd Blanche and William Marshall III, director of the Federal Bureau of Prisons, to reverse a policy affecting transgender inmates that lawmakers say is “endangering” their “health and safety.”

Markey, along with U.S. Sens. Jeffrey A. Merkley (D-Ore.) and Mazie K. Hirono (D-Hawaii), sent the letter that the Washington Blade verified on Monday.

The letter is a direct response to a change in prison policy that went into effect in February 2025, rolling back Biden-era protections for trans inmates. The senators described how President Trump’s Executive Order 14168, titled “Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government,” forced a policy shift they argue is rooted more in political rhetoric than in medical research or evidence-based correctional practices.

In the letter, the lawmakers wrote “On Feb. 21, 2025, the BOP issued a memo to implement President Trump’s EO, requiring BOP staff to ‘refer to individuals by their legal name or pronouns corresponding to their biological sex,’ banning the use of funds for any ‘items that align with transgender ideology,’ and suspending clothing accommodations, pat search accommodations, and support programs offered to transgender individuals.”

“In a second memo, issued one week later, the BOP banned the use of federal funds for ‘any medical procedure, treatment, or drug for the purpose of conforming an inmate’s appearance to that of the opposite sex.’ These changes have resulted in the denial — or threatened denial — of hormone treatment and gender-affirming accommodations for transgender individuals in BOP custody.”

“On Feb. 19, 2026, the BOP escalated its attacks, issuing a program statement titled, ‘Management of Inmates with Gender Dysphoria.’ It prohibits incarcerated people from receiving gender-affirming care, even if paid for with private funds. This practice forces incarcerated people to discontinue care, regardless of medical recommendations.”

The senators continued, “The agency has repeatedly enacted policies that strip transgender individuals of their gender identity and dignity. This includes requiring staff to refer to transgender individuals by pronouns that ‘align with their biological sex’ rather than gender identity and to confiscate gender-affirming items, such as undergarments, clothing, cosmetics, and wigs.”

“These policies risk triggering mental health crises, including increased suicidality, among incarcerated people with gender dysphoria. The BOP’s repeated guidance to roll back gender-affirming protections — despite a federal court order finding that the BOP’s actions to discontinue gender-affirming care are likely unlawful — generate confusion about the current state of regulations and convey the BOP’s indifference to court orders and the rule of law.”

“By stripping away appropriate medical and psychiatric care, safety protections, and measures to provide dignity, the BOP is exposing transgender individuals to significant harm.”

The Marshall Project, a nonprofit newsroom focused on the U.S. criminal justice system and immigration enforcement through data-driven reporting, also reported on the policy change. The outlet spoke with Shana Knizhnik, an attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union, about the impact of the changes.

“It’s clear that this new policy is a ban on gender affirming healthcare,” Knizhnik, who works for the nationwide chapter of the ACLU said. “This is a policy that disregards the medical needs of our plaintiffs.”

The letter also asked the BOP and the DOJ specific questions regarding why the policy went into effect, as lawmakers suggested the changes appear politically motivated rather than based on new medical evidence regarding treatment for trans inmates.

The senators requested answers to these trans policy-specific questions by May 21, including:

“Does the BOP plan to monitor and assess the impacts of recent policies that eliminate gender-affirming medical and psychiatric care?”

“Since January 20, 2025, how many transgender, nonbinary, intersex, and gender-diverse individuals have been transferred to a different facility to meet the EO’s goal of housing individuals ‘according to their biological sex?’”

“Given that the BOP has stopped enforcing Prison Rape Elimination Act regulations related to gender identity and collecting data on gender identity, how will the BOP protect the physical and emotional health and safety of incarcerated transgender individuals?”

“How does the BOP plan to monitor and assess the impact of eliminating protections against sexual violence for this population?”

“Does the BOP plan to institute a specific process by which transgender individuals may seek assistance or lodge complaints regarding harms they experience from the recent BOP policies and actions implementing President Trump’s EO?”

“Describe the specific criteria the BOP intends to use to determine whether it will allow a ‘social accommodation’ for gender dysphoria.”

Markey also included a personal statement to the Blade explaining why he is using his position on Capitol Hill to push for more information and advocate for reversing the policy.

“This administration continuously shows their contempt for trans people and a total disregard for their rights and humanity. As part of this cruel campaign, the Bureau of Prisons has systematically stripped health care access and basic protections from trans people, abandoning its duty to the people in its custody. I won’t stop fighting until this administration’s hateful anti-trans policies are reversed and trans people’s rights are secured.”

The Blade reached out to the DOJ and the BOP for comment but had not received a response at press time.

Continue Reading

Arts & Entertainment

Washington Blade’s Pride on the Pier returns June 13 to kick off D.C. Pride week

Pride on the Pier officially launches Pride Week in D.C.

Published

on

The Washington Blade’s annual Pride on the Pier celebration returns to The Wharf on Saturday, June 13, 2026 from 4-9 p.m., bringing thousands of LGBTQ community members and allies together for an unforgettable waterfront celebration to kick off Pride week in Washington, D.C.

Now in its eighth year, Washington Blade Pride on the Pier extends the city’s annual celebration of LGBTQ visibility to the bustling Wharf waterfront with an exciting array of activities and entertainment for all ages. The District Pier will offer DJs, dancing, drag, and other entertainment. Alcoholic beverages will be available for purchase for those 21 and older.

“Pride on the Pier has become one of the signature moments of Pride in D.C.,” said Lynne Brown, publisher of the Washington Blade. “There’s nothing like watching our community come together on the waterfront with live music and incredible energy as we kick off Pride week.”

Pride on the Pier is free and open to the public, with VIP tickets available for exclusive pier access to the Dockmaster Building. To purchase VIP tickets visit www.prideonthepierdc.com/vip

Additional entertainment announcements, sponsor activations, and event details will be released in the coming weeks.

Event Details:

📍 Location: District Pier at The Wharf (101 District Sq SW, Washington, DC)
📅 Dates: Friday, 13, 2026 

⏱️ 4-9PM
🎟️ VIP Tickets: www.PrideOnThePierDC.com/VIP

Continue Reading

Hungary

New Hungarian prime minister takes office

Péter Magyar’s party defeated anti-LGBTQ Viktor Orbán last month

Published

on

Péter Magyar votes in Budapest, Hungary on April 12, 2026. He has been sworn in as the country's new prime minister. (Screen capture via APT/YouTube)

Hungarian Prime Minister Péter Magyar took office on Saturday.

Magyar’s center-right Tisza party on April 12 defeated then-Prime Minister Viktor Orbán’s Fidesz-KDNP coalition. Vice President JD Vance less than a week before the election traveled to Budapest, the Hungarian capital, and urged Hungarians to support Orbán.

Orbán had been in office since 2010. He and his government faced widespread criticism over its anti-LGBTQ crackdown.

The European Commission in 2022 sued Hungary, which is a member of the EU, over the country’s anti-LGBTQ propaganda law. The European Union’s top court, the EU Court of Justice, on April 21 struck down the statute.

The EU while Orbán was office withheld upwards of €35 billion ($41.26) in funds to Hungary in response to concerns over corruption, rule of law, and other issues.

Hungarian lawmakers in March 2025 passed a bill that banned Pride events and allowed authorities to use facial recognition technology to identify those who participate in them. MPs later amended the Hungarian constitution to ban public LGBTQ events.

Upwards of 100,000 people last June defied the ban and marched in Budapest’s annual Pride parade.

“Congratulations to [Péter Magyar] on becoming prime minister of Hungary,” said European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen on X.

“This Europe Day, our hearts are in Budapest,” she added. “The hope and promise of renewal is a powerful signal in these challenging times.”

“We have important work ahead of us,” noted von der Leyen. “For Hungary and for Europe, we are moving forward together.”

Continue Reading

Popular