On the go

This blog is originally appeared at Dallas Voice

LGBTQ Americans Consider Moving to Mexico Amid Post-Election Concerns

CAROLINE SAVOIE | Contributing Writer

In the wake of the U.S. presidential election, many LGBTQ Americans are grappling with uncertainty about their future, with some contemplating relocating to safer, more inclusive destinations. Mexico, particularly Puerto Vallarta, has become a top choice for those seeking a new home.

With its affordable cost of living, thriving LGBTQ communities, and proximity to the U.S., Mexico is increasingly being seen as a viable option for those looking to escape the rising political tensions back home.

“The fear is palpable”

Lance Blann, a Dallas-based realtor known for his TikToks offering advice on navigating real estate transactions in both the U.S. and Mexico, has witnessed a surge in inquiries from LGBTQ individuals looking to move south. According to Blann, there has been an unprecedented spike in questions about obtaining residency in Mexico since the election.

“It’s crazy, the number of people contacting me wanting to know how to get residency in Mexico,” Blann said. “I don’t think people are overreacting to be scared. You can hear the fear in their voices. It’s palpable.”

Lance Blann

Blann has been helping people explore real estate opportunities in Puerto Vallarta, Mexico’s premier LGBTQ destination. Known for its welcoming atmosphere, Puerto Vallarta has earned a reputation as a safe haven for LGBTQ individuals, drawing expats from around the world.

“Puerto Vallarta, alongside Palm Springs, is one of the safest places in North America for the LGBTQ community,” Blann said. “It’s not like Cancun or Playa del Carmen. You feel safe from the cartels here, for the most part, and the community is strong.”

Thanks to his growing social media presence, Blann has become the go-to realtor for LGBTQ individuals considering a move to Mexico. His TikTok videos, which offer practical advice on everything from obtaining dual citizenship to purchasing property, have made him a trusted resource. This newfound visibility has resulted in a surge of inquiries, particularly since the election.

“People are scared about the next four years, and it’s not just retirees; it’s people in their 40s who feel alarmed,” Blann said.

Former Dallasite Larry Cook retired to Puerto Vallarta in May this year

Larry Cook, a gay man who retired to Puerto Vallarta in May 2024, says he is living proof that relocating to Mexico can be a transformative experience. Cook and his husband purchased a condo in Puerto Vallarta’s Zona Romantica in 2021.

“I never thought I’d retire here. I always imagined Greece,” Cook said. “But after visiting Puerto Vallarta several times, I never wanted to leave.”

Now, Cook is building a home in the up-and-coming Fluvial neighborhood, just three miles from the Zona Romantica.

“It’s got a residential feel, but you’re still close to the action,” he said. “Puerto Vallarta is a true community, not just a tourist destination.”

Cook highlighted the city’s affordable healthcare and low cost of living as major advantages. His experience mirrors what many LGBTQ expats discover when they move to Mexico: not only does the country offer affordability, but it also provides a sense of safety.

“I feel safer here than I did in Oak Lawn at night,” Cook said, referring to Dallas’s well-known Gayborhood.

Realtor Bob McCranie created the FleeRedStates.com website

LGBTQ Americans Flee to Mexico Amid Political Uncertainty

For Bob McCranie, a Dallas-based Realtor who created FleeRedStates.com, the rising wave of LGBTQ Americans exploring a move to Mexico isn’t a shock. Having helped countless LGBTQ individuals and families relocate through his real estate network, McCranie has witnessed a significant uptick in inquiries, particularly following political shifts in the U.S. According to McCranie, his website’s traffic spiked dramatically on Election Night.

“Queer migration has been a constant conversation among my friends for the last three to five years,” McCranie said. “But election years always drive it up. This time, we’ve seen a flood of inquiries.”

McCranie’s website, FleeRedStates.com, connects LGBTQ people with Realtors across the U.S. who understand their unique needs. The site features an interactive map with details about state governments and LGBTQ protections.

“When I first started [the website], people told me I was fear-mongering,” McCranie said. “But the things I’ve been talking about are happening. Parents of trans children, same-sex couples — they’re all worried about their safety and rights.”

Along with his real estate work, McCranie is part of the LGBTQ Real Estate Alliance, an organization supporting LGBTQ individuals in navigating the housing market.

“When you’re moving, you need someone who understands your family’s needs,” McCranie said. “That’s even more important when moving abroad.”

For some, McCranie said, the choice to leave the U.S. is about safety and survival. “I’m scared that the rights we fought for will be reversed and swing back even harder against us,” he explained. “I used to tell people that Dallas or Austin would always be safe for LGBTQ people. Now, I can’t say that with confidence anymore.”

Mexico as a Safe Haven

Puerto Vallarta has long been a popular LGBTQ destination, but increasingly, it’s becoming a permanent home for many. Blann notes that Mexico legalized same-sex marriage nationwide in 2022, with the state of Jalisco, where Puerto Vallarta is located, leading the way as early as 2016.

“This city is a safe haven, even for LGBTQ Mexicans,” Blann said.

Beyond legal protections, the sense of community is what draws many LGBTQ expats to Puerto Vallarta. The city is home to around 80,000 expats, offering a diverse and inclusive environment. Cook, who recently relocated to the area, emphasized the strength of the LGBTQ community there.

“Puerto Vallarta is a true community, not just a tourist destination,” Cook said. He noted that plans are underway for a new community center for LGBTQ youth and seniors, filling gaps in services that many expats feel are lacking in the U.S.

Affordable Healthcare and Low Living Costs

Cook said he was surprised by the high quality of healthcare in Mexico. “Healthcare here is excellent, better than what I was getting in the U.S.,” he shared. “Doctors own their own businesses, and you can just walk in without an appointment. I’ve had visits where they spent an hour with me, and I only paid $35, including two prescriptions.”

For pet owners, Cook’s experience was equally striking: he paid only $850 for a procedure on his dog in Puerto Vallarta that would have cost him $4,500 in Dallas.

Additionally, property taxes in Mexico are remarkably low. Cook paid just $75 in taxes on his condo in 2023, compared to the $8,000 he paid for his home in Dallas.

Navigating the Move

McCranie stresses the importance of working with real estate agents who understand the unique challenges LGBTQ individuals may face when moving abroad. He shared that some agents have even introduced him and his partner as “brothers” to avoid potential discrimination.

For those considering the move, McCranie emphasized the importance of understanding local laws and communities to ensure a smooth transition.

Blann, Cook, and McCranie all agree that while moving to Mexico can be life-changing, it’s not a decision to make lightly. Cook recommends spending at least six months in Puerto Vallarta on a tourist visa to get a feel for the area before making the move permanent.

“Explore the neighborhoods, figure out what terrain and weather you’re comfortable with,” Cook advised.

But beyond escaping political instability in the U.S., Cook urges potential expats to ensure that they’re drawn to the lifestyle in Puerto Vallarta. “Don’t move here just because of Trump,” Cook said. “Make sure you want the lifestyle Puerto Vallarta offers. It’s not enough to just want to leave the U.S.; you need to want to live in Mexico.”

Planning the Move

Jamie, 72, and her wife Carrie, 77, have been considering a move to Puerto Vallarta since Trump’s election in 2016. The couple, who have been together for 10 years and married for two, have known Cook and his husband Clint since their Dallas days. They’ve been thinking about relocating for some time, especially after seeing friends make the move.

“We visited Portugal a while back, but it just didn’t feel right,” Carrie said. “We’ve been thinking about moving since Trump won in 2016. It’s not just about escaping; it’s about finding a place where we can live without constantly being afraid of policies that will take away our rights.”

Having been active in LGBTQ rights protests in the 1970s, Carrie said the energy to continue fighting is gone. “Now, we’re just tired,” she said.

Drawn by the positive experiences shared by their friends, Jamie and Carrie are seriously considering Puerto Vallarta. They plan to visit in February to explore the area firsthand.

“I always pictured myself living out of the country when I was younger,” Jamie said. “Now, my family understands my concerns about the political climate, and they’re supportive.”

Jamie, who has a background in wildlife rehabilitation, is excited to continue her passion in Puerto Vallarta. “It feels like the right place,” she said.

A Final Decision

The potential erosion of LGBTQ+ rights in the U.S. is a major concern for Jamie. “I think it’s possible that gay marriage could be overturned,” she said. “If that happens, it’s just one more sign that things are eroding.”

Despite their emotional ties to Dallas, Jamie and Carrie are ready to let the future guide their decisions. “We’ll see what happens after January and after our trips to PV,” Jamie said. “I’m so grateful that my lifetime has been blessed. Now it’s time to look at my options.”

Blann, who’s received a flood of inquiries since the election, said he is planning an informational seminar to address the growing interest from LGBTQ individuals looking to relocate.

“People are scared about Project 2025, about the future of LGBTQ rights in the U.S.,” Blann said. “But Puerto Vallarta offers a sanctuary, a place where you can feel safe and be part of a community.”

Paxton files lawsuit against Biden administration over transgender worker protections

This blog originally appeared at The Hill.

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton (R) has once again filed a lawsuit against the Biden administration, this time targeting federal protections for transgender employees in the workplace.

The lawsuit, submitted Thursday in federal court, is directed at the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) and the Justice Department (DOJ). It challenges the legality of agency guidelines that define workplace harassment under federal law, seeking a permanent injunction to prevent their enforcement.

The EEOC guidelines, though not legally binding, assert that denying employees accommodations based on their gender identity—such as misgendering transgender workers or denying them access to gender-appropriate restrooms—constitutes unlawful workplace harassment.

In Thursday’s lawsuit, Paxton, alongside the conservative think tank Heritage Foundation, claimed the opposite. “The Biden-Harris Administration is once again attempting to rewrite federal law through undemocratic and illegal agency action,” Paxton stated. “This time, they are unlawfully weaponizing the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission to force private businesses and States to adopt ‘transgender’ mandates—Texas is suing to stop them.”

The lawsuit was filed in the Northern District of Texas’s Amarillo Division, where U.S. District Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk, a Trump appointee, presides over most cases. Last month, Kacsmaryk dismissed Paxton’s request to block an earlier version of the EEOC guidance, stating that a new complaint was required.

The EEOC declined to comment, referring inquiries to the DOJ, which did not immediately respond. Paxton, a vocal critic of progressive LGBTQ protections, has filed numerous lawsuits against the Biden administration since 2021, with most being directed to Kacsmaryk, according to the Texas Tribune.

Read more.

Appeals court denies request to remove injunction on rule designed to enhance protections for LGBTQ students

This blog originally appeared at NBC NEWS.

Republicans contend that the policy is a ploy to permit transgender girls to join girls’ athletic teams.

A federal appeals court on Wednesday refused to lift a judge’s order temporarily blocking the Biden administration’s new Title IX rule aimed at expanding protections for LGBTQ students.

The ruling from the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a preliminary injunction issued last month by a federal district judge in Kentucky. This order blocked the new rule in six states — Kentucky, Indiana, Ohio, Tennessee, Virginia, and West Virginia — though similar legal battles are ongoing in Republican-led states nationwide.

“In our view, the district court likely correctly concluded that the Rule’s definition of sex discrimination exceeds the (U.S. Education) Department’s authority,” the 6th Circuit’s three-judge panel stated in its majority ruling.

The Education Department did not immediately respond to requests for comment via email and phone.

Kentucky Attorney General Russell Coleman praised the ruling as “a victory for common sense.”

“For 50 years, Title IX has created equal opportunities for women and young girls in the classroom and on the field,” said Coleman, a Republican. “Today, the 6th Circuit becomes the first appellate court in the nation to halt President Biden’s blatant assault on these fundamental protections.”

Chris Hartman, executive director of the Fairness Campaign, a Kentucky-based LGBTQ advocacy group, warned that the ruling would endanger transgender children.

“We believe Kentucky schools have an obligation to protect all students, including transgender students, and that they should implement the new Title IX Rule regardless of the 6th Circuit’s opinion,” Hartman said in a statement Wednesday evening.

The rule aims to expand Title IX civil rights protections to LGBTQ students, broaden the definition of sexual harassment in schools and colleges, and introduce additional safeguards for victims. While civil rights advocates have praised the new protections, opponents argue that they undermine the spirit of Title IX, a 1972 law that prohibits sex discrimination in education.

Most Republican state attorneys general have taken legal action to challenge the new rule.

The regulation is set to take effect on Aug. 1, but judges have temporarily blocked its enforcement while legal cases proceed in 15 states: Alaska, Indiana, Idaho, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Montana, Ohio, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, West Virginia, and Wyoming.

The regulation faces legal challenges from 12 other states where enforcement has not been paused: Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Iowa, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Oregon, South Dakota, and South Carolina.

Republicans argue the policy is a ploy to allow transgender girls to participate in girls’ athletic teams. The Biden administration clarified that the rule does not apply to athletics.

In its ruling on Wednesday, the 6th Circuit panel noted that critics of the rule warned that implementing it just before the start of the new school year would impose an “onerous burden” on the states.

The 6th Circuit panel also expedited a full hearing of the case for this fall.

In granting the preliminary injunction last month, U.S. District Judge Danny C. Reeves in Kentucky noted that Title IX was intended to “level the playing field” between men and women in education, but said the department was seeking to “derail deeply rooted law” with the new policy.

“At bottom, the department would turn Title IX on its head by redefining ‘sex’ to include ‘gender identity,’” he said in his ruling. “But ‘sex’ and ‘gender identity’ do not mean the same thing. The department’s interpretation conflicts with the plain language of Title IX and therefore exceeds its authority to promulgate regulations under that statute.”

Responding at the time to Reeves’ action, the Education Department stated: “Title IX guarantees that no person experiences sex discrimination in a federally funded educational environment. The department crafted the final Title IX regulations following a rigorous process.”

The appeals court ruling included a partial dissent from one member of the three-judge panel.

“All three members of the panel, it bears emphasis, agree that these central provisions of the Rule should not be allowed to go into effect on August 1,” the majority ruling said. “Our modest disagreement turns on the question, in this emergency setting, of whether the other parts of the Rule can be separated from these central provisions.”

Read more.

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑