National
5 takeaways from Election Day
Obama’s marriage support was a good political move and other observations
Members of the community celebrated President Obama’s reelection at the Human Rights Campaign election watch party at Eatonville on 14th Street. (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)
Hailed as a watershed moment for the LGBT movement, Election Day yielded several milestones that political observers say will have a profound impact on the advancement of LGBT rights and marriage equality going forward.
Here are five takeaways from an evening that saw wins for marriage equality at the ballot and the election for the first time of an openly gay U.S. Senate candidate — not to mention the re-election of a U.S. president who endorsed marriage equality.
1. The sky’s the limit for gay candidates seeking political office
Lesbian U.S. Senate candidate Tammy Baldwin made history when she became the first openly gay person elected to the U.S. Senate in a highly contested race against former Wisconsin Gov. Tommy Thompson. She’ll be part of a record number of as many as seven openly gay, lesbian and bisexual candidates elected to Congress and 121 candidates endorsed by the Gay & Lesbian Victory Fund elected to various offices throughout the country.
Baldwin’s sexual orientation was virtually a non-issue during the campaign. The only time it came up was when Brian Nemoir, a Thompson campaign official, circulated a video of her dancing at a gay Pride festival and told media outlets, “Clearly, there’s no one better positioned to talk ‘heartland values’ than Tammy.” The incident resulted in negative press for Thompson, who apologized for his aide’s action.
The glass ceiling broken by Baldwin could be a hopeful sign for other LGBT officials seeking office — such as lesbian New York City Council Chair Christine Quinn, who’s likely to run for mayor of the nation’s largest city in 2013 — that sexual orientation needn’t be a factor even when pursuing the highest offices in the nation.
Dan Pinello, who’s gay and a political scientist at the City University of New York, said Baldwin’s election “was a remarkable achievement” as was the the election of additional openly gay people to the House.
“An LGBT candidate no longer has to worry about facing his or her sexual orientation in terms of it being an impediment in running for public office,” Pinello said. “Tammy Baldwin most clearly demonstrates that, her being elected the first openly gay or lesbian senator.”
Some barriers have yet to fall. Gay Republican Richard Tisei failed in his bid to unseat incumbent Democrat Rep. John Tierney from a House seat in Massachusetts, which means the LGBT contingent in Congress will be entirely Democratic and an openly gay non-incumbent Republican has yet to win election to Congress. No transgender candidate has won election to Congress, although Stacie Laughton, a Democrat, was elected in New Hampshire as the first openly transgender person to a state legislature in the country.
Denis Dison, a Victory Fund spokesperson, noted that 40 state legislatures will now have LGBT representation and said the priority for his organization over the next 10 years is to elect an openly LGBT person to each state throughout the country.
“That matters greatly at the state level; it matters greatly at the municipal level,” Dison said. “There are some states out there where there’s one out elected official, and that’s kind of a very tenuous position, and we want to make sure that we are building capacity — and that’s states that people don’t talk about very much: the Nebraskas and Kansas.”
2. Obama’s support of marriage equality was a good political move
At the time President Obama completed his 19-month “evolution” in May and announced his personal support for marriage rights for gay couples, many political observers feared a backlash against him at the polls.
Many predicted — as it turns out, correctly — that states once considered battlegrounds —Missouri, North Carolina and Indiana — would fall in the Republican column because of their large evangelical populations. Whether Obama would be able to make the difference in the Electoral College to reach 270 votes was unclear.
But the result was positive — most initially in terms of financing for the Obama campaign. According to an analysis from National Public Radio, donations to Obama nearly tripled in the immediate period after the announcement. The campaign took in nearly $9 million over three days, compared to $3.4 million in the three previous days. The Washington Blade reported anecdotally that while many major donors had already maxed out their contributions, Obama’s new support for marriage equality resulted in his supporters making more small donations to the campaign.
Richard Socarides, a gay New York advocate who pushed Obama to support same-sex marriage, said coming out for marriage equality helped Obama not only in terms of donations before the election, but energized LGBT voters to come to the polls.
“I think it excited Democrats and young voters and gay and lesbian voters,” Socarides said. “His margin of victory in the popular vote was less than his vote among gays and lesbians, so I think gays and lesbians turned out for him.”
Socarides pointed to exit polling showing gay voters made up 5 percent of the electorate and 77 percent of them voted for Obama — an increase from the 2008 election — as evidence the gay vote is significant and helped Obama claim victory.
The youth vote was also significant in the election. According to the early National Exit Poll conducted by Edison Research, Obama won 60 percent of the youth vote, compared to 36 percent for Romney. Voters from ages 18 to 29 represented 19 percent of the electorate, which is an increase of one percentage point from 2008.
Pinello said Obama’s support for marriage equality helped drive to the polls younger voters, who are generally more supportive of same-sex marriage.
“The Obama campaign used marriage equality as a means to target younger voters to turn out in greater numbers as has been the case in the past,” Pinello said. “I think that was probably fairly wise of the Obama campaign. I think they succeeded in strengthening and increasing the size of their base in doing so.”
3. LGBT support alone won’t save Republicans in moderate districts
Despite the apparent support that Obama won as a result of coming out for marriage equality, Republicans in office who were supportive of LGBT issues didn’t fare as well in the 2012 election.
In Massachusetts, Tisei was notable among those Republicans. Also of note is freshman Rep. Nan Hayworth (R-N.Y.), a co-sponsor of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, who lost to gay Democrat Sean Patrick Maloney; Rep. Judy Biggert (R-Ill.), who voted for “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal even before the Pentagon report came out in favor of open service; and Rep. Mary Bono Mack (R-Calif.), who during her five terms in Congress voted against a Federal Marriage Amendment and in favor of ENDA and hate crimes legislation. U.S. Senate candidate Linda McMahon in Connecticut was also defeated; she supported Defense of Marriage Act repeal.
These Republicans were supported by gay GOP groups. The American Unity PAC, which was working to support pro-LGBT Republicans, notably spent a total of $420,000 in advertising to protect Bono Mack; $260,000 in Connecticut for McMahon; $540,000 in Biggert’s campaign; $530,000 in the Tisei race and $260,000 in ad buys on behalf of Hayworth. But each of these investments ended in losses.
Jeff Cook, senior adviser to the American Unity PAC, blamed the losses on the general poor showing by the Republican Party during the 2012 election and said the party as a whole needs to adapt to survive.
“It was a tough night for Republicans in most of the country,” Cook added. “The impact was particularly felt in moderate, swing districts where our party’s brand too often has limited our candidates’ appeal. It’s increasingly clear that there is a need to modernize the Republican Party, not only to win full inclusion for gay and lesbian Americans, but to ensure that the GOP can compete and win in the 21st century.”
Cook noted that Reps. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Fla.) and Richard Hanna (R-N.Y.), pro-LGBT Republicans who were also recipients of funds from the American Unity PAC, won re-election. These candidates weren’t in as highly contested races.
4. The national trend in favor of marriage equality is real
Four states yielded good news for supporters of same-sex marriage on Tuesday night: Maine approved a voter-initiated referendum legalizing same-sex marriage; voters in Maryland and Washington upheld same-sex marriage laws passed by the legislatures put up for referenda; and Minnesota voters rejected a constitutional amendment that would have restricted marriage to one man, one woman.
The wins were a remarkable turnaround after loses in years past, breaking a losing streak in 32 states where same-sex marriage lost at the ballot. Moreover, the wins also validate national polls showing a gradual rise in support for same-sex marriage, which has led to a bare majority supporting marriage rights for gay couples.
Lanae Erickson, a lesbian and director of social policy and politics for the moderate group Third Way, said the election demonstrated marriage equality is coming into the mainstream after having been a hot-button issue for many years.
“I think this election showed that marriage and LGBT issues are no longer going to be a divisive social issue in the way they have been in the past,” Erickson said. “It definitely shows that the losing season that we had is relegated to history and now we’re in a new season where we can win frequently if not most of the time, especially on marriage.”
The victories have spurred talk about which states will be next to legalize same-sex marriage as Illinois and Minnesota are in position to take action in 2013. In New Jersey, Gov. Chris Christie has said he would favor allowing a referendum on same-sex marriage, but LGBT advocates in the state have dismissed that option.
Pinello warned that the marriage equality side won by a slim margin in these states — in Washington State, for example, the marriage law was approved by 52 percent as votes continued to trickle in — and said LGBT advocates shouldn’t attempt to place the issue on the ballot in a year other than a presidential election when the youth and progressive turnout isn’t high.
“If activists were to decide then to try it again in other states like Oregon, for example, in 2014, an off-year election, I think it might be a mistake because, again, the part of the population who are LGBT friendly tend not to turn out as much in off-year elections,” Pinello said.
5. The influence of anti-gay groups is waning
The Election Day results were a disaster for social conservative groups trying to stop the legalization of same-sex marriage and elect Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney.
The day after the election, the National Organization for Marriage’s Brian Brown issued a statement saying the American public still favors marriage between one man, one woman, but his organization was up against “a huge financial advantage” from marriage equality supporters.
In an email message to supporters on Wednesday, the Family Research Council’s Tony Perkins dismissed the results at the ballot, saying, “And while homosexuals may be celebrating an end to our movement’s perfect record, they still have a long way to go to match the 32 states where Americans voted overwhelmingly to protect the union of a man and woman.”
Erickson said although NOM is a one-issue group and unlikely to change its tune even in the wake of its losses, social conservative groups may seek to veer away from demonizing LGBT people.
“I think a lot of the other social conservative groups will turn their attention toward other issues because they realize that the momentum on this one just is not in their favor,” Erickson said. “They’re pushing a lot, for example, to say, ‘Yeah, younger people are trending better on LGBT issues, but they’re more pro-life than their older counterparts and we can still get them on immigration and we can still get them on abortion.”
One question is whether heads will roll at these organizations as a result of their failures on Election Day. Will Brown and Perkins be forced to step down? The Huffington Post reported on Wednesday that a Republican operative said billionaire donors who contributed to the Republican Party are “livid” about the election results. Similar heat may be coming down on social conservative groups.
Pinello said conservative organizations will likely have more difficulty finding funds as donations dry up in the wake of their defeats.
“I think their momentum has been taken away; they’ve been deflated,” Pinello said. “They’re no longer guaranteed a win, so, donors, I think would be much more circumspect about whether this is the best place to put their money.”
The White House
VIDEO: Gay journalist detained for booing Trumps at ‘Chicago’ opening night
Eugene Ramirez booed first family at Kennedy Center
President Donald Trump and first lady Melania Trump attended the opening night of “Chicago” at the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts on Tuesday. They were greeted by a mix of cheers, applause, and some audible boos.
Among them was Eugene Ramirez, a gay Washington resident, who later shared his account of the night after being briefly detained by security for booing the president and giving a thumbs-down gesture — an expression of what many would call a textbook definition of constitutionally protected speech to criticize the government.
Ramirez attended the opening night performance with a group of friends, hoping to catch a final show before the center undergoes two years of major changes under Trump oversight. The musical, based on a 1926 play of the same name, has become synonymous with Broadway success.
With music by John Kander, lyrics by Fred Ebb, and a book by Ebb and Bob Fosse, “Chicago” has cemented itself as a cultural staple — known for its signature Fosse choreography, stripped-down staging, and sleek, campy aesthetic. The story follows Roxie Hart and Velma Kelly, women who murder their husbands but — with the help of the manipulative, charismatic, and narcissistic attorney Billy Flynn — walk away scot-free.
It remains the longest-running American musical in Broadway history, and its 2002 film adaptation famously won the Academy Award for Best Picture. On this night, however, the production also became the backdrop for a very modern moment of political protest.
“I accompanied five friends to opening night of ‘Chicago’, as a way to enjoy a final performance in the Kennedy Center as we know it,” Ramirez began to recount to the Washington Blade, describing the moment his group settled into their seats inside the ornate Opera House theater.
Just before the performance began, the twice impeached president and first lady appeared in the balcony box, drawing immediate attention from the audience below. Theatergoers stood, cheered, clapped, and waved, while Ramirez made a different choice.
While accounts of the crowd’s reaction have varied, Ramirez said his response was intentional, immediate, and within his rights. Moments after booing and giving a thumbs-down while recording on his iPhone, security intervened.
The video of Ramirez booing the Trump’s is here:
“Within moments, the director [of security] and another guard approached and escorted me to a side area where several other security guards were waiting,” he said. “I was detained until everyone was seated and the lights dimmed.”
As he was escorted away, Ramirez said his instincts as a journalist kicked in. A former lead anchor for Sinclair’s national evening news broadcast, he said the situation immediately felt off — or more aptly put — as if he could see the strings being pulled from someone attempting to control the narrative.
“Journalism is a vocation, not just a job. I immediately knew there wasn’t just an uncomfortable interaction with security,” he said. “The Kennedy Center is a federally funded cultural institution, and being questioned about speech related to the president in that setting felt like something the public should know about.”
Ramirez explained the difference between a standard visit by a public official and this performance: the president’s appearance wasn’t just ceremonial; it was very clearly a media moment.
“The White House press pool was there, and it was clear this was an effort to manage the president’s image in the media,” Ramirez continued. “The irony was not lost on me that this was happening on opening night of ‘Chicago’, a musical about manipulating the press to shape public perception.”
According to Ramirez, the explanation he received from Kennedy Center Director of Safety and Security Karles C. Jackson Sr., was brief, but illuminating.
“He said, ‘they don’t want booing,’ and even called out my thumbs-down gesture. He never clarified who ‘they’ were, but whether it was the administration or the Kennedy Center, the distinction felt meaningless,” he explained. “Mr. Jackson ultimately told me he was just trying to do his job, shook my hand, and allowed me to return to my seat once the lights dimmed and the overture started playing.”
Ramirez said he didn’t blame the guard individually, noting the broader context of the Kennedy Center’s uncertain future and the pressures staff were under.
“With the center closing in the coming months, some of these security guards being pressured to restrict our freedom of speech may only have a few weeks of work left.”
He believes the decision to remove him was driven less by disruption than optics, particularly given the presence of the press.
“It was very clearly about protection — whether protecting the president from visible dissent, or his image before the media present. There was no disruption as almost everyone was standing and reacting loudly to the arrival of the president and first lady, with cheers, applause, and hand gestures. The difference was that my reaction, unlike most, was negative.”
Drawing on his experience covering public officials, Ramirez said the incident felt more about controlling perception than security.
“Usually, law enforcement may monitor or intervene if there’s a disruption, but here there was no disruption at all. Simply expressing dissent in a public, cultural space drew the attention of security. It made it feel less like a matter of decorum and more like an effort to control the narrative around the president,” he said. “It’s about what happens when dissent is treated as disruption rather than a right.”
“The show hadn’t started. I threatened no one. Billy Flynn would have approved of the optics. The rest of us should be paying attention.”
Ramirez framed the incident as part of a broader constitutional concern, one that is plaguing the Trump-Vance administration as they continue to reject rules and normalcy set forth by other reserved presidents.
“Being singled out by security at a federally funded institution for expressing dissent shouldn’t be brushed off; it undermines the First Amendment,” he said, looking at it slightly distanced from it now. “Being of Cuban heritage, and a journalist, it’s a right I’m not willing to give up readily.”
“Publicly funded cultural institutions should allow visible dissent, even in politically charged moments,” he added. “Of course, I understand the need to manage disruptions during a performance, but that was not the case here.”
The themes of “Chicago”, a long-running satire about media manipulation and public perception, added another layer of irony to the experience, Ramirez explained.
“The satire truly leapt off the stage! A show about controlling the narrative, manipulating the press, and covering up truths by leaning on showmanship and distractions. The show is decades old, but could’ve been written today. We’re being razzle-dazzled daily and it’s getting harder to tell fact from fiction, no matter where you get your news.”
He, being gay, also acknowledged how hard it must have been for the performers on stage, assuming that at least some in the cast were also members of the LGBTQ community — and artists — two things Trump doesn’t always get along with.
“It was not lost on me that many of the actors on that stage, that the president and first lady presumably applauded, are members of the LGBTQ community which this administration has rolled back protections for under the guise of religious liberty and free speech, resulting in blatant discrimination.”
He pointed to a particular number that felt surreal given the circumstances.
“Its ‘Razzle Dazzle’ number celebrates keeping audiences off balance; at its climax, a massive American flag descends as the song celebrates blinding audiences to what is real. Watching that scene after being detained for a thumbs-down was surreal.”
Ramirez said the show’s closing lines were especially sharp given the presidential audience and what he just experienced.
“At the end of the show,
Velma says: ‘You know, a lot of people have lost faith in America.’
Roxie replies: ‘And for what America stands for.’
Velma: ‘But we are the living examples of what a wonderful country this is.’
Roxie: ‘So we’d just like to say thank you and God bless you.’
They had both just gotten away with murder!”
His closing lines, however, were a bit more pointed than “scintillating sinners” Roxie Hart and Velma Kelly’s were in the show.
“Democracy only works when citizens are allowed to boo,” he said. “Tuesday night at the Kennedy Center, ‘Chicago’ made that point better than I ever could.”
The Blade reached out to the Kennedy Center but did not receive a comment back.
Idaho
Idaho Gov. signs harshest anti-trans bathroom bill in the country
Idaho continues to lead the country in anti-LGBTQ legislation, passing two laws restricting rights this week.
Idaho Gov. Brad Little signed into law a bill that criminalizes transgender people for using bathrooms that align with their gender identity rather than their assigned sex at birth, including in private businesses. Little signed the bill Tuesday afternoon — just as demonstrators rallied on the Capitol steps in Boise for Transgender Day of Visibility.
The law takes effect July 1.
House Bill 752 allows the government to charge people who “knowingly and willfully” enter bathrooms that do not align with their assigned sex at birth with jail time, making this the most restrictive bathroom bill in the nation. The vote had no issue passing in the Republican supermajority-controlled legislature, with 54 ayes and 15 nays in the House and 28 ayes and 7 nays in the Senate.
The bill applies to government-owned buildings and places of public accommodation, including any business (either publicly or privately owned) or space that is open to the public and offers goods, services, or facilities. These include restaurants (bars, cafes), lodging (hotels, motels, inns), entertainment and recreational spaces (gyms, theaters, sports venues, pools), healthcare and service buildings (hospitals, clinics, professional offices), and transportation-related spaces (including airports and bus stations).
A first offense carries a misdemeanor, punishable by up to one year in prison. A second offense, or any additional offense within five years, is a felony, punishable by up to five years in prison.
The bill’s sponsor, Coeur d’Alene Republican Sen. Ben Toews, said it reflects the “common sense realities” that Idahoans have — despite the issue not being “common sense” enough to be included in the state Republican Party’s official platform.
Republican legislators have deemed this, and similar measures restricting bathroom access to a person’s sex at birth, a matter of “protecting privacy and safety,” according to a similar measure passed earlier this year. Yet this claim contradicts statements from officials working to protect safety, as well as available data on the matter — there is no evidence that trans individuals accessing gender-aligned bathrooms are a threat to safety or privacy.
This expansive and invasive legislative action appears to contradict what Gov. Brad Little says he and his party stand for. On his website, Little touts his efforts to remove red tape for Idahoans, saying they have “cut or simplified 95-percent of regulations” since 2019. Signing legislation that effectively requires policing who can use which bathroom runs counter to that goal — and, unlike the transgender bathroom bill, reducing government regulation is part of the party’s official platform.
“We believe the growth of government is unnecessary and has a negative impact on both the conduct of business and our individual lives,” the Idaho Republican Party platform reads. “We endorse the review of all government programs and encourage their assumption by private enterprise where appropriate and workable. Programs which are outside of government’s constitutional obligations, not cost effective, or have outlived their usefulness should be terminated.”
The Idaho Fraternal Order of Police President, Bryan Lovell, wrote a letter to the legislature that having the responsibility to check a person’s sex at birth fall to police “presents significant practical enforcement challenges for law enforcement officers in the field.”
“In many circumstances, there is no clear or reasonable way for officers to make that determination without engaging in questioning or investigative actions that could be viewed as invasive and inappropriate,” the letter said.
Sen. Ron Taylor, a Democrat from Hailey, said House Bill 752 is about discrimination. He said constituents told him they would move out of Idaho if it passed — because it would throw their transgender children in jail.
“Now maybe that’s what some of us want, is to chase a population that’s marginalized out of Idaho,” Taylor said. “But that’s not Idaho. Idaho was founded by a population that was marginalized.”
Idaho’s American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) went even farther to criticize the Little’s signature on House Bill 752, arguing the legislation does the opposite of its stated goal of reducing risks to the privacy and dignity of every Idahoan.
“The bill does nothing to address real criminal acts, such as sexual assault or voyeurism,” a statement from the organization founded in 1988 read. “As cisgender people who do not conform to rigid gender norms could face accusations, harassment, and arrest for using a public restroom.”
In addition to creating a criminal issue where there was none, the legislation opens up a Pandora’s box of litigation that taxpayers would ultimately have to pay for.
“When public institutions and local businesses are forced to engage in these expensive and unnecessary lawsuits, taxpayers and customers foot the bill,” the ACLU added.
Advocates for sexual health and gender freedom have called this legislation a full assault on transgender people’s right to exist in public, saying bills like this trigger harassment, increase violence against transgender people, and impose criminal penalties for not conforming to traditional gender roles.
Planned Parenthood Alliance Advocates Idaho called the bill “the most extreme anti-transgender bathroom ban in the nation.”
This is not the only anti-LGBTQ action the governor has taken. He signed a bill earlier that morning to fine cities for flying the LGBTQ+ pride flag, which, according to Idaho Capital Sun, was retaliatory action against Boise’s City Council for a vote last year declaring the pride flag and the organ donor flag as official flags — a workaround to a previous state flag ban the Legislature passed last year.
Boise Mayor Lauren McLean said the city had been flying the pride flag for a decade, but will remove it for the time being to prevent a fine that would “ultimately fall on the taxpayers of Boise to shoulder.”
“But let me be clear: Boise’s values have not changed, and they are not defined by any single action taken at the Statehouse,” McLean said after removing the Pride flag from the official pole.
This approach to LGBTQ poltics reflects a broader trend among Republicans in power in the state. In 2020, Idaho became the first state to ban transgender girls and women from competing on sports teams that align with their gender identity, which is currently being challenged in the United States Supreme Court. In 2023, state lawmakers made it a felony for doctors to provide gender-affirming health care to transgender youth. In 2024, lawmakers expanded the ban to apply to taxpayer funds and government property, forbidding Medicaid from covering gender-affirming care.
The White House
Kristi Noem ‘devastated’ as husband’s alleged fetish spending surfaces
Former DHS head ‘blindsided’ by allegations
Former Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem said she is “devastated” after reports alleged her husband paid large sums to fetish models and shared cross-dressing photos while married to her.
The Daily Mail first reported the story on March 31, accusing 56-year-old Bryon Noem — the former second gentleman of South Dakota and husband to the former DHS secretary — of exchanging hundreds of messages with three women in the “bimbofication” fetish scene. According to the report, he praised their surgically enhanced bodies and was asked to send them money though various online accounts during the 14 months his wife led the nation’s largest federal law enforcement agency.
He sent them at least $25,000 via Cash App and PayPal, according to the story, that also included photos reportedly show him wearing pink shorts and a flesh-colored top with balloons simulating breasts.
When the payments were delayed or failed to be sent, the women would get mad and ignore him, the story reads. At least one woman who didn’t receive money after texting Noem was so disgruntled she posted about his behavior on social media before later deleting it.
The allegations quickly went viral across social media and major news outlets. Representatives for Kristi Noem told the New York Post she was “devastated” and that her family was “blindsided” by the claims, while requesting privacy and prayers.
President Donald Trump, when asked by the Daily Mail, expressed surprise that the Noem family had confirmed the photos’ authenticity.
“They confirmed it? Wow, well, I feel badly for the family if that’s the case, that’s too bad,” Trump told the outlet that broke the story. “I haven’t seen anything. I don’t know anything about it. That’s too bad, but I just know nothing about it.”
Kristi and Bryon Noem met in high school and married in 1992, according to the Daily Mail. They have two daughters, Kassidy, 31, and Kennedy, 29, and a son, Booker, 23.
The controversy comes after Noem’s recent removal from one of the highest-ranking positions in Trump’s Cabinet. Markwayne Mullin was sworn in as Homeland Security Secretary last week, though Noem remains part of the president’s team as special envoy to the Shield of the Americas, a U.S.-led regional security organization focused on coordinating efforts to combat organized crime, drug trafficking, and illegal migration throughout the Western Hemisphere.
Noem’s political career spans more than a decade across state and federal government jobs. She served in the South Dakota House of Representatives from 2007 to 2011, in the U.S. House of Representatives from 2011 to 2019, and as Governor of South Dakota from 2019 to 2025.
She was confirmed as Secretary of Homeland Security during Trump’s second term, serving from 2025 until her removal following widespread backlash over escalating U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement operations, which included separating children from their families and two separate fatal shootings of U.S. citizens by ICE officers during protests. Trump reportedly decided to fire Noem from DHS after her congressional hearing related to the deaths, in which she stated that the president had approved a $200 million-plus government-funded DHS advertising campaign that prominently featured her.
The reports about her husband have also reignited speculation about Noem’s personal life, including rumors involving Trump supporting political operative Corey Lewandowski, described by some as the “worst-kept secret in D.C.”
Some accounts suggest Bryon Noem was aware of the alleged relationship — and benefited from it. Political commentator Ryan James Girdusky fueled that speculation during an August 2025 episode of the It’s a Numbers Game podcast, citing what he described as “D.C. gossip” that a top Cabinet official — rumored to be Noem — had privately claimed her husband was gay.
“A reporter walked up to her and said, ‘Why are you having this affair? Why haven’t you met up with your husband? Why aren’t you divorcing your husband?’” Girdusky said on the podcast. “And she blurted out to this reporter, who I know, and said, ‘Oh, my husband’s gay.’”
Unlike the unverified claims surrounding her husband, Noem’s political record on LGBTQ issues is well documented.
In 2024, while serving as governor, her administration canceled a contract with a community health worker organization, resulting in a $300,000 settlement with a transgender advocacy group. The contract had included a roughly $136,000 state-administered federal grant, of which about $39,000 had already been distributed, according to the group’s attorneys.
Noem also championed a series of policies restricting trans rights. She signed executive orders in 2021 barring transgender girls and women from competing on women’s sports teams at public schools and colleges in the state. In addition to using executive authority to enact these policies, she signed legislation into law. She enacted House Bill 1080, which bans age-appropriate, medically necessary health care for trans youth — despite widespread support for such care from major medical associations and global health authorities.
Noem also supported legislation aimed at restricting trans athletes, though she ultimately vetoed one bill, citing potential legal challenges from the NCAA while maintaining support for its intent. Additionally, she signed a Religious Freedom Restoration Act that LGBTQ advocates say enables discrimination under the guise of protecting religious liberty.
VIDEO: Gay journalist detained for booing Trumps at ‘Chicago’ opening night
Idaho Gov. signs harshest anti-trans bathroom bill in the country
Award-winning D.C. chef reaching new culinary heights
Trans-driven ‘Serpent’s Skin’ delivers campy sapphic horror
Now more than ever: the importance of LGBTQ activism
‘Out for McDuffie’ event held at D.C. gay bar
‘Jonah’ an undeniably compelling but unusual memory play
The Oscar-losing performance that’s too good to miss
Thousands attend ‘No Kings’ protests in D.C.
