The Comings & Goings column is about sharing the professional successes of our community. We want to recognize those landing new jobs, new clients for their business, joining boards of organizations and other achievements. Please share your successes with us at [email protected]. 

The Comings & Goings column also invites LGBTQ+ college students to share their successes with us. If you have been elected to a student government position, gotten an exciting internship, or are graduating and beginning your career with a great job, let us know so we can share your success. 

Congratulations to David Mack onbeing named the inaugural executive director of the IN series. On accepting the position Mack said, “I’m excited to join the D.C. community as IN Series’ inaugural executive director as the company enters its adventurous next chapter. I’m eager to meet audiences across the Baltimore and Washington, D.C. area in order to help expand access to innovative opera — whether they’re longtime enthusiasts or discovering it for the first time. Thank you … to the IN Series hiring committee for inviting me into your world with open arms, and such generosity of spirit.”

Mack is a seasoned arts executive and producer, with more than 15 years of leadership experience in innovative performing arts organizations, including the African American Art &Culture Complex; Joe Goode Performance Group; and Invertigo Dance Theatre. As a strategic arts consultant, his clients have included LA Dance Project, Diavolo, Architecture in Motion, and Center Theatre Group. As general manager of The Industry, he produced Invisible Cities at LA’s Union Station in collaboration with the LA County Metropolitan Transportation Authority. 

Mack has served on the boards of the LA Producer’s League, Western Arts Alliance, and Creative West, and advocated on behalf of artists as a member of the SF Arts Alliance, and Greater Bay Area Arts Coalition. Mack was co-founder of Theatre Magnet, Artist Magnet and Artist Magnet Justice Alliance, a series of Oakland-based arts service and consulting organizations. He is currently a DeVos Institute of Arts & Nonprofit Management Global Executive fellow. He earned his master’s in theater at the California Institute of the Arts.

Congratulations also to Chord Bezerra who is returning to the U.S. Pharmacopeia as Senior Design Manager. Upon accepting the position he said, “Returning to U.S. Pharmacopeia as Senior Design Manager feels like coming home to a mission I care deeply about — using design to make complex science clearer, more human, and more accessible to the people it serves.”

Bezerra has more than 20 years of experience in design leadership and management. He has most recently been manager, Brand and Advertising, CareFirst Blue Cross Blue Shield. Prior to that he was Senior Lead Designer (contractor) CareFirst Blue Cross Blue Shield. His initial stint with Pharmacopeia in Rockville, Md., was as a senior graphic designer. While there, he oversaw award-winning design (2020 Hermes & Marcom Awards); mentored and directed junior designers; and fostered visual storytelling solutions by directing junior designers for two years. He has served as chair and founding member of eQuality Alliance, USP’s first LGBTQIA+ Affinity Group.  

Bezerra had his own company for many years, Chord Bezerra Creative in D.C. Clients included national and non-profit organizations such as American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases, The Limited, Columbia Business School, Victory Fund, Zengo Cycling, Capital Pride, and Andrew Christian, among others. He earned his bachelor’s degree in communications from the University of Delaware.

Democracy Forward and the American Civil Liberties Union, two organizations focused on protecting Americans’ constitutional rights, filed a class-action lawsuit Thursday in federal court challenging the Trump-Vance administration’s bathroom ban policies.

The lawsuit, filed on behalf of LeAnne Withrow, a civilian employee of the Illinois National Guard, challenges the administration’s policy prohibiting transgender and intersex federal employees from using restrooms aligned with their gender. The policy claims that allowing trans people in bathrooms would “deprive [women assigned female at birth] of their dignity, safety, and well-being.”

The lawsuit responds to the executive order titled “Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government,” signed by President Donald Trump on his first day in office. It alleges that the order and its implementation violate Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits sex discrimination in employment. In 2020, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that Title VII protects trans workers from discrimination based on sex.

Since its issuance, the executive order has faced widespread backlash from constitutional rights and LGBTQ advocacy groups for discriminating against trans and intersex people.

The lawsuit asserts that Withrow, along with numerous other trans and intersex federal employees, is forced to choose between performing her duties and being allowed to use the restroom safely.

“There is no credible evidence that allowing transgender people access to restrooms aligning with their gender identity jeopardizes the safety or privacy of non-transgender users,” the lawsuit states, directly challenging claims of safety risks.

Withrow detailed the daily impact of the policy in her statement included in the lawsuit.

“I want to help soldiers, families, veterans — and then I want to go home at the end of the day. At some point in between, I will probably need to use the bathroom,” she said.

The filing notes that Withrow takes extreme measures to avoid using the restroom, which the Cleveland Clinic reports most people need to use anywhere from 1–15 times per day depending on hydration.

“Ms. Withrow almost never eats breakfast, rarely eats lunch, and drinks less than the equivalent of one 17 oz. bottle of water at work on most days.”

In addition to withholding food and water, the policy subjects her to ongoing stress and fear:

“Ms. Withrow would feel unsafe, humiliated, and degraded using a men’s restroom … Individuals seeing her enter the men’s restroom might try to prevent her from doing so or physically harm her,” the lawsuit states. “The actions of defendants have caused Ms. Withrow to suffer physical and emotional distress and have limited her ability to effectively perform her job.”

“No one should have to choose between their career in service and their own dignity,” Withrow added. “I bring respect and honor to the work I do to support military families, and I hope the court will restore dignity to transgender people like me who serve this country every day.”

Withrow is a lead Military and Family Readiness Specialist and civilian employee of the Illinois National Guard. Previously, she served as a staff sergeant and has received multiple commendations, including the Illinois National Guard Abraham Lincoln Medal of Freedom.

The lawsuit cites the American Medical Association, the largest national association of physicians, which has stated that policies excluding trans individuals from facilities consistent with their gender identity have harmful effects on health, safety, and well-being.

“Policies excluding transgender individuals from facilities consistent with their gender identity have detrimental effects on the health, safety and well-being of those individuals,” the lawsuit states on page 32.

Advocates have condemned the policy since its signing in January and continue to push back against the administration. Leaders from ACLU-D.C., ACLU of Illinois, and Democracy Forward all provided comments on the lawsuit and the ongoing fight for trans rights.

“We cannot let the Trump administration target transgender people in the federal government or in public life,” said ACLU-D.C. Senior Staff Attorney Michael Perloff. “An executive order micromanaging which bathroom civil servants use is discrimination, plain and simple, and must be stopped.”

“It is absurd that in her home state of Illinois, LeAnne can use any other restroom consistent with her gender — other than the ones controlled by the federal government,” said Michelle Garcia, deputy legal director at the ACLU of Illinois. “The Trump administration’s reckless policies are discriminatory and must be reversed.”

“This policy is hateful bigotry aimed at denying hardworking federal employees their basic dignity simply because they are transgender,” said Kaitlyn Golden, senior counsel at Democracy Forward. “It is only because of brave individuals like LeAnne that we can push back against this injustice. Democracy Forward is honored to work with our partners in this case and is eager to defeat this insidious effort to discriminate against transgender federal workers.”

The U.S. Coast Guard has reversed course on a recent policy shift that removed swastikas — long used by hate-based groups to signify white supremacy and antisemitism — from its list of “hate symbols.” After widespread backlash, the symbols, initially reclassified as “potentially divisive,” have been restored to their previous designation as hate symbols.

Under the now-revised policy, which was originally published earlier this month, symbols including swastikas and nooses were labeled “potentially divisive,” a change officials said could still trigger an investigation and potential disciplinary action, including possible dishonorable discharge.

The Washington Post first reported the change on Thursday, outlining how the updated guidance departed from earlier Coast Guard policy.

According to the November 2025 U.S. Coast Guard policy document, page 36 (11–1 in print):

“Potentially divisive symbols and flags include, but are not limited to, the following: a noose, a swastika, and any symbols or flags co-opted or adopted by hate-based groups as representations of supremacy, racial or religious intolerance, or other bias.”

This conflicted with the February 2023 U.S. Coast Guard policy document, page 21 (19 in print), which stated:

“The following is a non-exhaustive list of symbols whose display, presentation, creation, or depiction would constitute a potential hate incident: a noose, a swastika, supremacist symbols, Confederate symbols or flags, and anti-Semitic symbols. The display of these types of symbols constitutes a potential hate incident because hate-based groups have co-opted or adopted them as symbols of supremacy, racial or religious intolerance, or other bias.”

The corrected classification now reads:

“Divisive or hate symbols and flags are prohibited. These symbols and flags include, but are not limited to, the following: a noose, a swastika, and any symbols or flags co-opted or adopted by hate-based groups as representations of supremacy, racial or religious intolerance, anti-semitism, or any other improper bias.”

The revised policy also explicitly prohibits the display of any divisive or hate symbols, stating they “shall be removed from all Coast Guard workplaces, facilities, and assets.”

In addition to the reclassification, the earlier policy change had instituted a significant procedural shift: while past policy placed no time limit on reporting potential hate incidents, the new guidance required reports of “potentially divisive” symbols to be filed within 45 days.

This shortened reporting window drew immediate criticism from within the service. One Coast Guard official, speaking to the Post, warned that the new structure could deter reporting, particularly among minority service members.

“If you are at sea, and your shipmate has a swastika in their rack, and you are a Black person or Jew, and you are going to be stuck at sea with them for the next 60 days, are you going to feel safe reporting that up your chain of command?” the official said.

The Coast Guard reversed course following this backlash, reverting to a Biden-era classification and removing the “potentially divisive” language from the policy.

These rapid changes follow a directive from Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, who ordered a sweeping review of hazing, bullying, and harassment policies, arguing that longstanding guidelines were “overly broad” and were “jeopardizing combat readiness, mission accomplishment, and trust in the organization.”

After the Post’s reporting, senior Coast Guard leadership attempted to reassure service members that the updated language would not weaken the service’s stance on extremism. In a message to members — obtained by ABC News — Commandant Adm. Kevin Lunday and Master Chief Petty Officer of the Coast Guard Phil Waldron addressed concerns directly.

“Let me be absolutely clear: the Coast Guard’s policy prohibiting hate and discrimination is absolute,” the message said. “These prohibited symbols represent repugnant ideologies that are in direct opposition to everything we stand for. We have zero tolerance for hate within our ranks.”

Still, the policy changes prompted swift political reaction.

U.S. Sen. Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.), a member of the Senate Commerce Committee, urged the Trump-Vance administration to reverse the modifications before they took effect.

“At a time when antisemitism is rising in the United States and around the world, relaxing policies aimed at fighting hate crimes not only sends the wrong message to the men and women of our Coast Guard, but it puts their safety at risk,” Rosen said in a statement to the Post.

The controversy comes as federal agencies face growing scrutiny over how they regulate symbolic expression and disciplinary standards. Just days earlier, FBI Director Kash Patel issued a letter concerning the dismissal of David Maltinsky, a veteran FBI employee in training to become a special agent. Maltinsky was “summarily dismissed” after the “inappropriate display” of a Pride flag at the Los Angeles FBI field office — a flag he had flown with his supervisors’ approval.

Taken together, the incidents underscore escalating tensions across federal law enforcement and military branches over the policing of symbols, speech, and expression — at a time when debates around extremism, diversity, and LGBTQ visibility remain deeply polarized.