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.
Delaware
Vote to enshrine same-sex marriage in state constitution fails in Delaware
‘General Assembly turned its back on the people of this state’
The Delaware General Assembly on Tuesday failed to pass Senate Bill 100 (SB-100), an amendment that would add protections for same-sex and interracial marriage to the Delaware Constitution.
In order for the bill to pass, 28 out of 41 members needed to vote ‘yes,’ meaning all 27 Democrats and one Republican needed to vote in favor of the bill.
Rep. Eric Morrison (D-27) told the Blade that an anonymous Republican member agreed to vote in favor prior to the vote but ultimately did not follow through on that promise.
“It’s a shame,” said Rep. Morrison, who’s gay. He explained the difficult nature of passing this amendment with only three legislative days remaining in this session.
The bill needs to receive a two-thirds majority vote in two different sessions and the current two-year long session ends on July 1. Thus, if the bill does not pass before July 1, it will take a minimum of three years to pass the amendment.
The bill was introduced by State Sen. Russ Huxtable (D-07) on June 5, 2025.
Rep. Josue Ortega (D-03) was one of two Democrats to not vote in favor of the bill, voting ‘no.’ Rep. Ortega has not responded to the Blade’s request for comment.
Rep. Madinah Wilson-Anton (D-27) was the other Democrat missing from the ‘yes’ votes. She did not vote on the bill.
Sponsor of the measure, Rep. Claire Snyder-Hall (D-14), made a technical decision to reverse her vote from a ‘yes’ to a ‘no’ last-minute in order to keep the bill alive.
In a Facebook post, Rep. Snyder-Hall said that, “The General Assembly turned its back on the people of this state.”
“When we had the chance to add an extra layer of protection from attempts to turn back the clock and strip our constituents of the rights that Democrats fought for decades to secure, we failed,” said Snyder-Hall.
However, Snyder-Hall said that the failure to pass this bill is not the end. “There are still three legislative days left in the 153rd General Assembly and I am hopeful that we will be able to get the votes required to pass this incredibly basic — but important — bill.”
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.
