Connect with us

National

Internal emails reveal questions, confusion on Trump religious freedom directive

Labor Department guidance seen to enable anti-LGBTQ discrimination

Published

on

Emails obtained by the Washington Blade through a FOIA lawsuit reveal officials in the Trump administration’s Labor Department were mired in questions and confusion about a 2018 religious freedom directive to comply with the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in the Masterpiece Cakeshop case.

Befuddlement and inquiries from business leaders, lawmakers, and media as well as progressive and conservative advocates alike reflect the criticism of the Labor Department’s religious freedom directive as a means to enable anti-LGBTQ discrimination.

A 2018 Blade story on the religious freedom directive, titled “New Trump administration memo on Obama order alarms LGBT advocates,” was circulated in an email chain among officials within the Office of Federal Contract Compliance. One of the top officials in that office, Christopher Seely, recognized the predictable impact the directive would have by writing in response to the Blade article: “It is not surprising that the LGBT community sees the directive as targeting them.”

The Masterpiece Cakeshop directive, as of now, is still in place, a Labor Department spokesperson confirmed for the Blade on Wednesday. However, the Biden administration has issued a proposed notice to rescind the rule implementing the legal requirements regarding the Equal Opportunity clause’s religious exemption.

The proposed rule, the Labor Department spokesperson said, is at the White House Office of Information & Regulatory Affairs pending review and will be published when that is concluded, which will lead to a public comment period and additional steps to make the rule final.

As reported by the Blade in August 2018, the Labor Department guidance purported to “incorporate recent developments in the law regarding religion-exercising organizations and individuals” with the enforcement of the executive order signed by former President Obama in 2014 barring federal contractors from engaging in discrimination against LGBTQ people in the workplace.

The imprint of former President Trump’s executive orders on religious freedom, which critics said were a means to allow federal grantees and contractors to engage in anti-LGBTQ discrimination, is also seen in the directive. It says that guidance has “similarly reminded the federal government of its duty to protect religious exercise — and not to impede it.”

All in all, the instructions seems aimed at allowing religiously affiliated non-profits to discriminate against LGBTQ workers despite Obama’s executive order prohibiting such bias in employment. Previously, religious non-profits, including religious schools and universities, were required to abide by the executive order and received no religious exemption.

The Washington Blade obtained the internal emails as a result of a lawsuit filed in September 2020 under the Freedom of Information Act with attorneys from the Reporters Committee for the Freedom of the Press, which sought communications within OFCCP to uncover information about the motivation behind the rule change in religious freedom. The Labor Department continues to produce emails to the Blade as a result of the ongoing litigation.

Labor Department officials appear to have anticipated the confusion and flurry of questions they would receive over the 2018 religious freedom directive. One email chain details discussions on a proposed email to stakeholders for when the guidance would be issued. The actual talking points are redacted in the email obtained by the Blade. Craig Leen, then director at OFFCP, concludes after the discussion: “[W]e are planning to proceed tomorrow.”

Among the emails obtained through this lawsuit were several from LGBTQ advocates questioning officials within the Labor Department on the 2018 Masterpiece Cakeshop directive, including representatives from the American Civil Liberties Union and the National Center for Transgender Equality and one separate FOIA request that appears to have come from the Center for American Progress.

One email chain discusses a FOIA request — identified as “Gruberg 865067,” which is presumably from Sharita Gruberg, vice president of LGBTQ research and communications at the Center for American Progress — seeking the number of requests made by federal contractors for a religious freedom exemption under Obama’s executive order. (Gruberg wasn’t available to comment by Blade deadline to confirm she was the one to make that FOIA request.)

A Labor Department official in the email chain describes the request as the “first FOIA request making inquiry as to whether or not a religious exemption has been requested since the directive was issued.” Another official responds, “I am not aware of one,” although it’s unclear from the email chain whether or not it was in response to the question about any federal contractors seeking a religious exemption or knowledge of any other FOIA requests on the directive.

But another email chain, one with officials preparing for a meeting with Democrats on the Senate Health, Education, Labor & Pensions Committee, reveals the absence of any complaints from religious freedom non-profits in complying with Obama’s executive order against anti-LGBTQ discrimination.

One Labor Department official asks for the number of reviews of religious organizations and the number of complaints received from religious organizations. A detailed chart from another official reveals a total of 11 reviews between fiscal years 2007 and 2016 with an average of about one per year. However, the official concludes in terms of complaints: “There were no complaint investigations.”

Marika Litras, an official within the Labor Department responds: “Very few which is what I suspected.” In response to a follow-up question from Litras on whether any complaints were received, the other official responds, “No complaints received either for 813110.” Litras replies: “Wow interesting thank you.”

Another top OFFCP official, John Haymaker, chimes in with a response uncharacteristically glib for government officials, but revealing of the basic understanding of the fairness of adhering to non-discrimination principles: “Well, I would hope that religious organizations would be better-behaved than most at least in public.”

The Labor Department’s internal responses to an ACLU inquiry in September 2018 are found in a separate email chain, which reveals a meeting scheduled for Sept. 17, 2018 between Ian Thompson, legislative director of the ACLU, and U.S. government officials on the religious freedom directive. Not much is revealed in the email chain other than talk about the right room to host the meeting.

Thompson, responding Wednesday to a question from the Blade on the email exchange, confirmed the meeting between the ACLU and Labor Department officials took place.

“As we repeatedly saw, the Trump administration had an agenda of using religion as a license to discriminate,” Thompson said. “We used this meeting to speak truth to power directly, raising our objections about how this directive would harm LGBTQ people and people from minority faith groups. Ultimately – as we knew they would – the Trump administration decided to move forward with this dangerous, discriminatory agenda.”

One email from Debra Carr, a Labor Department career official who had been serving director of policy for OFCCP, writing to colleagues about the meeting and discussing possible questions.”Who do you want to take a shot at drafting answers should they be needed?” Carr said. (The possible questions Carr writes, however, are redacted in the email obtained by the Blade.)

Another meeting between LGBTQ advocates and Trump administration officials is revealed to have taken place with the National Center for Transgender Equality taking the lead.

The job of drafting answers apparently went back to Carr. Litras, the other official at the Labor Department, responds: “Debra, can you take a stab at drafting brief responses?”

Carr passes the assignment to Christopher Seeley: “Hi Chris, take a shot at drafting responses to these.” Seeley, in turn, forwarded notice of the assignment to his supervisor, Harvey Fort: “This just came through as an assignment for me. I’m not sure the urgency, but it may eat into my week.” Fort replies: “Understood. That issue is very important to Craig and OFCCP.”

Seeley appears to have come with responses to the potential NCTE questions with a subsequent email to Carr: “Here are the responses I drafted.” (The actual email responses, however, are an attachment and not included in the email dump obtained by the Blade.)

The meeting between Labor Department offices and OFCPP, however, apparently did little if anything to allay the concerns of the transgender group. A subsequent chain includes an email from Ma’ayan Anafi, then policy counsel for the National Center for Transgender Equality, who says she has attached a letter from groups with “grave concerns” about the religious freedom directive.

“Please find attached a letter on behalf of 42 organizations expressing our grave concerns regarding Directive 2018-03, issued to OFCCP staff on August 10,” Anafi writes.

A proposed response to the letter is included in the email chain, although the content of the letter is redacted in the version obtained by Blade. Leen asks colleagues for review, which he said will be sent on OFCCP letterhead and sent to the Office of the Executive Secretariat. NCTE wasn’t immediately available to comment Wednesday on the whether it had obtained the directive and its reaction.

There were also inquiries from social conservative groups, including the Texas-based First Liberty Institute and the House Values Action Team, a group of conservative lawmakers led by Rep. Vicky Hartzler (R-Mo.).

One email from Katie Doherty, executive director of the Values Action Team, suggests possible dates and times for a meeting with Labor Department officials and invites them to brief lawmakers at an upcoming coalition meeting for the purpose of “providing a brief overview of DOL’s changes.”

The meeting appears to have taken place. In a subsequent exchange, a Labor Department official talks about a proposal from social conservatives “regarding their recommendations for implementing Directive 2018-03” as proposed in an email from Mike Berry, deputy general counsel at the First Liberty Institute.

“It was great to meet you and Mr. Leen last week at the House VAT meeting,” Berry writes. “Per our post-meeting discussion, I am sending you a document outlining our proposals for implementing Directive 2018-03. We would be happy to discuss this further, whether with representatives from OFCCP, or via a listening session, etc.”

Leen, in a subsequent email, affirms receipt of the recommendations, but asks his colleague to remind the First Liberty Institute he has little jurisdiction to implement them.

“Please thank Mr. Berry for providing this information and let him know we will review it,” Leen writes. “I am available to meet with him to discuss the directive if he would like. As for the rulemaking process, please let him know we are unable to comment on that, and he will have the opportunity to submit comments in response to a proposed rule.”

Other emails circulated questions on the religious freedom directive from business community groups, including the New York-based Equality Institute and the Center for Workplace Compliance. In addition to the Blade, questions from Buzzfeed are discussed, as well as an article from Bloomberg and a joint letter from Jewish religious leaders objecting to the directive.

Jennifer Pizer, senior counsel and director of strategic initiatives for the LGBTQ group Lamdba Legal, said Wednesday in response to a Blade inquiry on internal talk at the Labor Department the guidance was “just one of the slew of outrageous rule changes the Trump administration issued to greenlight harmful, legally inexcusable religion-based discrimination.

“Such discrimination continues to be widespread in employment as well as in medical and social services delivery, education, and other areas of public life for LGBTQ people and many others,” Pizer said. “And it hits hardest those who have limited options.”

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

Congress

HRC president campaigns for Chris Pappas in NH

Gay congressman running to succeed retiring U.S. Sen. Jeanne Shaheen

Published

on

Human Rights Campaign President Kelley Robinson speaks at the group's 2025 National Dinner in D.C. She campaigned for U.S. Rep. Chris Pappas (D-N.H.) in New Hampshire on Aug. 30, 2026. (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

Human Rights Campaign President Kelley Robinson on Sunday campaigned for U.S. Rep. Chris Pappas (D-N.H.) in New Hampshire.

Robinson traveled to Manchester, the state’s largest city, nine days before the Sept. 8 primary that will determine who will vie for retiring U.S. Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.)’s seat.

Former U.S. Sen. John E. Sununu, who represented New Hampshire in the U.S. Senate from 2003-2009, will face off against former U.S. Sen. Scott Brown, who represented Massachusetts in the U.S. Senate from 2010-2013, in the Republican primary.

Karishma Manzur is among the Democrats challenging Pappas.

A poll the University of New Hampshire Survey Center released on Aug. 26 shows Sununu is ahead of Brown. The same survey shows Pappas ahead of Manzur and his other Democratic challengers.

The UNH Survey Center poll shows Sununu ahead of Pappas by a 45-43 percent margin if they were to face off in the general election. The margin of error is +/-2.1 percent.

Pappas would become the first openly gay man elected to the U.S. Senate if he were to win in November.

Continue Reading

National

Milo Yiannopoulos deported to UK

ICE arrested far-right provocateur in New Orleans on Thursday

Published

on

Milo Yiannopoulos (Photo via Homeland Security @DHSgov/X account)

Editor’s note: The Department of Homeland Security on Saturday said Milo Yiannopoulos has been deported to the U.K.

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement on Thursday arrested far-right provocateur Milo Yiannopoulos.

A DHS spokesperson in a statement sent to the Washington Blade said ICE arrested Yiannopoulos, who they described as “an illegal alien from the United Kingdom,” at Louis Armstrong New Orleans International Airport.

The DHS spokesperson said Yiannopoulos “legally entered the country” in New York on May 14, 2019.

“He chose to overstay his welcome in violation of our nation’s laws,” said the spokesperson.

The DHS spokesperson said an immigration judge on July 22 “issued a final order of removal” for Yiannopoulos “after failing to show up for his immigration hearing.” The Times-Picayune newspaper in New Orleans on Friday reported Yiannopoulos is being held at an ICE detention center in Alexandria, La., which is about 200 miles northwest of the Crescent City.

“He will remain in ICE custody pending removal,” said the DHS spokesperson.

Yiannopoulos has, among other things, repeatedly targeted transgender people and Muslims.

The American Conservative Union, which organizes the annual Conversative Political Action Conference, in 2017 disinvited Yiannopoulos from speaking at that year’s CPAC after a video in which he appeared to condone sex between adults and underage boys emerged. Yiannopoulos subsequently resigned from Breitbart News, a far-right news website, where he had been a senior editor.

Yiannopoulos later that year married his boyfriend in Hawaii. The far-right provocateur in 2021 claimed he was an “ex-gay.”

The Australian government in 2019 banned Yiannopoulos from entering the country “on character grounds.” Yiannopoulos was also banned from Facebook, Twitter (now X), and other social media platforms.

Milo Yiannopoulos speaks at a “Gays for Trump” event during the 2016 Republican National Convention in Cleveland. (Washington Blade file photo by Michael Key)

The Times-Picayune reported Yiannopoulos “most recently worked for” Ye, formerly known as Kanye West.

The controversial rapper is scheduled to perform in New Orleans on Friday.

Laura Loomer, a far-right conspiracy theorist who is close to President Donald Trump, has called for Yiannopoulos’s deportation. Loomer on Friday wrote on X that she “reported him to ICE and the FBI” after he “called for me to be assassinated.”

Continue Reading

California

San Francisco, long a queer safe haven, remains competitive for homebuyers

AI boom has boosted market as housing shortages continue

Published

on

San Francisco’s LGBTQ Castro neighborhood is seeing an uptick in home purchases, local real estate agents said. (Photo by Rick Gerharter)

LGBTQ people have a variety of housing options when they’re lucky enough to be able to afford property. In San Francisco – long considered a safe haven for the queer community – individual needs have to be weighed both against the city’s chronic housing shortage and a competitive but often lucrative job market.

After a lull of several years, the city’s real estate market has heated up in recent months, driven by the city’s economic recovery post-COVID lockdowns and the artificial intelligence boom.

For Rick Page, 68, and Anthony Farace, 57, both gay men, the job market was a top reason to move back to the city after they’d left the Bay Area five years ago.

Page said the couple had left behind a “huge home in a town called Oakhurst, on the way to Yosemite.” When moving back to San Francisco they wanted to balance suburban and downtown vibes, Farace said, leading them to settle in Diamond Heights, a tiny neighborhood built atop three hills above Noe Valley, that has suburban sensibilities but isn’t too far from downtown.

“In the summer it’s a little foggy but it’s nicer up here the rest of the time, and where it felt like you aren’t downtown where it’s just concrete and buildings,” Farace said. 

Added Page, “It sounds goofy, but if there’s a tsunami, it won’t get all the way up here.”

Page said that in the spring the couple initially bought a relatively small studio in Diamond Heights. But they found that it didn’t meet their needs and purchased a second studio unit nearby that did. They closed on the larger condo unit in October.

“It just didn’t have any kind of patio or outdoor thing for the dog,” Page said of their first studio, “so we saw something upgraded with a kitchen redone, nice hardwood floors, a fireplace, a sunny patio, so it was much nicer. We bought that one, now we have to figure out what to do with the first one.”

The first unit was $450,000 and the second $520,000, they stated.

The couple also mentioned a lack of some of the downtown, South of Market, and Mission District street disorder that garnered negative headlines in the past several years. The couple also noted that Diamond Heights is more affordable than traditionally high-priced Russian Hill, which is closer to downtown. 

Nevertheless, “The employment, the social life is better” in San Francisco, Page added. 

Federal data shows many LGBTQ people want to own a home.

Fannie Mae, the government sponsored enterprise that buys home loans, does have some LGBT data, according to research from 2023 that was published in 2024. The data is the result of sexual orientation and gender identity identifiers in the National Housing Survey. It did not ask about queer representation.

According to the report, 8.6% of respondents identified as lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender – similar to the U.S. Census Bureau’s Household Pulse Survey. The survey included responses from a weighted total of 12,363 people 18 years and older, with a weighted total of 1,059 identifying as LGBT.

The research found the LGBT homeownership rate to be 46%, which is much lower than the overall U.S. homeownership rate of 65%.

The latest available data from The Urban Institute reveals that the homeownership rate for individuals identifying as LGBTQ+ stands at 51%, in contrast to 71% for those who identify as both straight and cisgender. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, at least 1.3 million same-sex couples reside in the U.S., meaning a significant number of LGBTQ people in this country do not own their own homes.

In San Francisco, the Diamond Heights neighborhood is just a half-hour walk from the Castro, and even shorter on the bus. 

Charlie Mader is a gay man who has been a Realtor in San Francisco for “just under 25 years,” with a particular emphasis on Diamond Heights, the Castro, and Noe Valley. He said that while many LGBTQ people want to live relatively close to a queer neighborhood, such as the Castro, “It’s not like it used to be.”

Even in spite of a recent backlash to LGBTQ equality in the mid-2020s, leading to a number of federal policies largely targeting transgender and gender-nonconforming people, Mader said that since marriage equality, “You hear ‘There’s no need for us to live together in a gay ghetto,’ and we’re interspersed throughout the community and the country.”

Marriage equality became legal in California in June 2013, two years before the U.S. Supreme Court made same-sex unions legal nationwide in 2015.

Mader said marriage equality helped incentivize more LGBTQ home-buying due to an old Clinton administration tax law that gave married couples favorable tax incentives versus single homebuyers. 

But even within the City-by-the-Bay, the distinction between neighborhoods is not as stark.

“I hear the Mission is just as gay as the Castro is, and the food is better,” Mader said. “I can’t argue with that.”

Angel Carney, a lesbian Realtor, has also been in the Castro area for decades. She said the threshold of home ownership there has risen dramatically. 

“When I first started,” which was in 2002, she said, “I had teachers, I had nurses, I had a doctor … It was diverse in terms of who was buying. Everybody had a way to get into the market.”

Now, “with tech, they blew out everybody,” she added, saying first-time homebuyers are sometimes competing with tech employees making six-figure salaries from their early 20s due to their economic opportunities.

Carney said that even so, “It’s mostly a two-income household who’s buying in the Castro,” largely people in their 30s.

“LGBTQ is more of a rarity,” she added. “I’ve seen more non-LGBTQ, I would say, couples buying in the Castro.”

One reason is because while it is such an iconic epicenter of the LGBTQ community, it is “definitely a transit hub, and it’s geographically central, so if you work on the Peninsula, you go over Diamond Street and you’re on [Highway] 280. You can get to BART, to the airport, it definitely is transit centric for work, for traveling, if you’re a tech worker.”

Understanding that unhoused people are often part of San Francisco neighborhoods such as the Castro is also a factor, Mader said. 

“Because gays are so tolerant, it draws a magnet for people who you know are distressed and so you see more antisocial behavior, begging on the street, people just getting high because they know they can get away with it,” he said. That can impact people’s desire to buy a forever home in one neighborhood or another.

Indeed, the Castro has experienced fewer open-air drug scenes than other parts of the city, such as Sixth Street or the Civic Center Plaza, which are both near the downtown core. Such activity has, however, remained a persistent complaint of Castro merchants. In early December, Sophie Marie, a legislative aide to gay Board of Supervisors President Rafael Mandelman, who represents the neighborhood as District 8 supervisor, noted that “a lot” of unhoused people have recently moved into the Castro as they leave South of Market and Civic Center amid an increase in law enforcement activity and attention from city government there.

The Castro is among those neighborhoods seeing building height limits increased as a result of Mayor Daniel Lurie’s family zoning plan that, after much rancor, passed the Board of Supervisors for the final time on December 9. The plan is intended to increase the city’s housing stock to meet state housing goals.

San Francisco’s median home sale price rose nearly 6% to $1.85 million, its highest amount since 2022, earlier this year, as the San Francisco Standard reported.  

Mader said that nonetheless, “There are empty condos everywhere for sale,” and that market is down 20% from its peak.

“Right now I’m selling for $625,000 – I’ve sold for $100,000 more than that,” Mader noted.

Carney agreed that condos are very available right now.

“If you’re thinking about entering the market, think about condos,” she advised. “When interest rates go down, prices will go up, so get in now on a condo. People say they’re waiting for the market to drop – well, the market dropped on condos. Those are a great buy right now.”

The Fannie Mae data showed that homeownership aspirations are high among LGBT consumers, with 83% saying they “would like to buy at some point” or “continue to own,” the report stated. This share is comparable to non-LGBT consumers, the report stated. LGBT consumers also believe there are more obstacles to owning a home than their non-LGBT peers.

Those obstacles include that over 70% of LGBT respondents said it was difficult to get a home mortgage today, compared to only 55% of non-LGBT respondents, according to the research. LGBT consumers were more concerned about closing costs, credit score or history, current debt, and insufficient income for monthly payments.

The Federal Reserve on December 10 lowered interest rates for the third time this year. The recent reduction was by a quarter of a percentage point, as the New York Times reported. The new range is between 3.25% to 3.75%. But CNBC noted that mortgage rates may remain higher because they are less impacted by the Fed. The average rate for a 30-year, fixed-rate mortgage is currently about 6.35%, the network reported December 10.

Nationally, the real estate market is dealing with the same uncertainty as the rest of the economy, now almost one year into President Donald Trump’s second term.

“Everyone is afraid of another Trump recession,” Mader said. “People are not buying houses especially in places like Florida, where they’re having all kinds of issues with insurance.”
Florida is the nation’s most expensive state for home insurance due to natural disasters like hurricanes. 

California is also experiencing insurance issues, particularly in areas prone to wildfires, as the San Francisco Chronicle reported. Most of the Bay Area is not as affected as other parts of the state, though insurance premiums are rising for home insurance.

Not everyone wants to live in a big city. 

Mark Kliem, who’s part of the LGBTQ Real Estate Alliance, focuses on the North Bay, encompassing Solano, Napa, and Sonoma counties. 

“Consumers can contact the alliance no matter where they live and connect with the nearest LGBTQ agent close to their area whether they are buyers or sellers,” Kliem, who is gay, said.
Kliem lives in the Solano County city of Vallejo, where the real estate market took a dive during the Great Recession.

“A lot of investors swooped in and bought up as many of those places as they could, so there was a lot of investing in property through that, and a lot of flippers,” he said, referring to people who buy a property, fix it up, and then sell it for a profit.

Now, the area is one of the country’s hottest real estate markets, he said, because it’s near San Francisco, has warmer weather and is more affordable long-term.

“It’s a good place location wise – we’re on a bay, we have a ferry service to downtown San Francisco. We don’t have BART, so it’s a little problematic to get to the nearest BART, but our weather gets even warmer, less fog, than Oakland. Throughout the year, it’s a five-degree difference from San Francisco.”

Ultimately, the Golden State and the Bay Area in particular are poised to remain competitive for buyers of all sexual orientations and gender identity – despite the fact that that leads to so many barriers to entry. Gay Realtor Anthony Waite, 30, explained why.

“A lot of people who moved to Austin, Texas [during the COVID pandemic lockdowns] said there’s not a lot to do,” Waite said. “In San Francisco, you could find something to do every single corner every hour, day and night. Texas doesn’t offer that.”

(Editor’s note: This article was originally published by the Bay Area Reporter and is part of a national initiative exploring how geography, policy, and local conditions influence access to opportunity. Find more stories at economicopportunitylab.com .)

Continue Reading

Popular