A Republican legislator in Utah is trying to change a road named for civil rights leader Harvey Milk so that it honors anti-LGBTQ+ MAGA podcaster Charlie Kirk.
Milk, a San Francisco city councilmember in the 1970s, was one of the first out LGBTQ+ people elected to public office and was integral in leading the fight against California’s Briggs Initiative, which would have banned gay people from being teachers. Kirk spoke out against LGBTQ+ rights and said that it was “God’s perfect law” that called for people to stone gay people to death. Both of them were shot to death.
Utah Rep. Trevor Lee (R) introduced a bill to change Salt Lake City’s Harvey Milk Blvd to “Charlie Kirk Blvd” earlier this week.
In an interview with ABC4, Lee claimed that the only reason he chose Harvey Milk Blvd to be renamed – and not any other road in the state – was because Milk was from California. Kirk was from Arizona but was died in Orem, Utah.
“From the vast majority of Utahns, they would say that Harvey Milk does not have any connection to Utah whatsoever,” Lee said about his bill. “But Charlie Kirk does now, especially after being assassinated in the state of Utah.”
ABC 4 noted that Harvey Milk Blvd. isn’t a state road and that the city government is in charge of naming it, which could mean that the state legislature doesn’t have the authority to rename it.
Lee has a long history of anti-LGBTQ+ legislation. He introduced a bill earlier this year to ban Pride flags in government buildings. His bill would have allowed Nazi and Confederate flags because, he argued, those are “historic,” while it would ban the rainbow flag.
Also this year, Lee threatened to withdraw state funding from the state’s NHL team, the Utah Mammoths, because the team posted a rainbow-colored version of its logo for Pride Month and wrote “Happy Pride” on social media.
“Utahns overwhelmingly don’t support pride month,” Lee said at the time. Lee has not cited any proof for his ability to speak for the “vast majority” of people in his state. He represents Utah House of Representatives District 16, a district of around 40,000 inhabitants that includes parts of Layton.
In 2022, Lee said on a podcast that Utah Gov. Spencer Cox (R) “might even be transgender because he’s all for everything they say and do.” Cox is not transgender and has signed anti-trans legislation.
“Was that before or after he vetoed a bill for tr***ies?” Lee said, using an anti-trans slur.
Lee then claimed to speak for Black people, saying that “a lot of my friends who are Black, they’d be like, yeah, man, I don’t agree with all that LGBTQ stuff.”
“I’m like, that’s embarrassing. I wouldn’t want to be associated with those people,” Lee said.
He said that it was “crazy white liberals who do not have another purpose in life” who need to stop supporting LGBTQ+ rights and “start families and make babies.”
That same year, the Salt Lake Tribune found that Lee was running a secret account on Twitter to attack LGBTQ+ people while posting imagery associated with the “DezNat” or “Deseret Nation” movement, a rightwing movement that advocates for a Mormon, white ethnostate. The movement is not supported by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
“Yes, than our spineless governor can stop acting like he needs to let transsexuals destroy our girls in sports,” he wrote on that account in one post.
In another post, he shared a meme that accused LGBTQ+ teachers of trying to turn kids transgender, a rightwing myth used to advocate banning LGBTQ+ people and allies from being teachers.
In 2021, he posted that a meme calling Pride Month “Satanic” was “amazing.”
“Doing things that are explicit, you know, people that are topless, that are running around in underwear and they have children there,” Lee said in an interview at the time about Pride. “Yeah, I think that’s satanic. I think that’s horrible.”
Lee also said that “teachers should be paid less not more” with the hashtag “#deznat.”
On Sept. 29, 2025, the Government of Canada revised its travel advisory for Canadians entering the United States. The updates include new details for entry and exit requirements regarding passports, visas, and U.S. permanent residents, as well as changes to law and culture that could impact 2SLGBTQI+ persons.
The new advisory cautions that U.S. immigration authorities may reevaluate visa status or residency eligibility in some cases, particularly for those with prior violations or irregularities. It also highlights potential challenges for travelers whose passport gender markers — such as Canada’s “X” designation — may not be recognized in U.S. federal systems, which are reportedly transitioning to require sex assigned at birth in some documentation.
“While the Government of Canada issues passports with a “X” gender identifier, it cannot guarantee your entry or transit through other countries,” the advisory warns. “You might face entry restrictions in countries that do not recognize the “X” gender identifier. Before you leave, verify this information with the closest foreign representative for your destination.”
According to the updated advisory: “Federal systems in the U.S. are changing to no longer accept markers of gender identity. Sex assigned at birth may now be requested by federal forms and processes, including:
visa applications
NEXUS applications
passenger manifests
passport applications
Social Security applications
“Laws also vary by state and municipality. Some states have enacted laws affecting 2SLGBTQI+ persons. Check relevant state and local laws.”
The nation’s leading LGBTQ advocacy groups are sounding the alarm over reports that the FBI may soon classify transgender people as a threat group — a move advocates say would be unconstitutional, dangerous, and rooted in political retribution.
At a joint press briefing held over Zoom last week, the heads of the Human Rights Campaign, Transgender Law Center, Equality Federation, GLAAD, PFLAG, and the Southern Poverty Law Center condemned the possibility that the FBI, in coordination with the Heritage Foundation, is working to designate transgender people as “violent extremists.”
The warning comes after a story earlier this month by independent journalist Ken Klippenstein, who reported that two anonymous national security officials said the FBI is considering treating trans subjects as a subset of its new threat category. That classification — originally created under the Biden administration as “Anti-Authority and Anti-Government Violent Extremists” (AGAAVE) — was first applied to Jan. 6 rioters and other right-wing extremists.
For more than an hour last Wednesday, LGBTQ leaders denounced the reported FBI proposal and warned of the consequences of targeting one of the country’s most vulnerable communities. They emphasized that such a move would represent a violation of basic human rights, further fuel misinformation, and give legitimacy to political attacks already directed at transgender people.
Kelley Robinson, president of the Human Rights Campaign, warned of the broader danger for the LGBTQ community if this happens.
“Americans can no longer count on the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, not when political violence runs rampant, not when political retribution goes unchecked, not when hate is being incited by our president.”
Robinson argued that claims of “Transgender Ideology-Inspired Violent Extremism” are not rooted in reality. For example, Gun Violence Archive Executive Director Mark Bryant has said that out of 5,000 mass shootings tracked by the archive, the number of trans or LGBTQ+ suspects is in “the single digit numbers.”
“Trans Americans are more likely to be the victim of a violent crime than a perpetrator of one… violence committed by trans Americans is a lie, a lie that only begets more violence.”
Shelby Chestnut of the Transgender Law Center warned that the federal government’s posture would escalate attacks on the community.
“Bullying communities and manufacturing chaos will never erase the truth that we are far more connected than divided,” Chestnut said. “In the coming days and weeks, you will see increased targeting of our organizations and our communities and mis and disinformation being weaponized at the highest level of government.”
Fran Hutchins of the Equality Federation described the move as a direct assault on trans people, echoing Chestnut’s points — but made it clear that this will not stop organizations supporting transgender people from continuing their work.
“This is a campaign that weaponizes fear and misinformation to isolate and harm our communities,” she said. “Let’s call it what it is. It’s political violence… We will not be erased.”
Sarah Kate Ellis, president of GLAAD, the LGBTQ media watchdog organization, urged the press not to fall into false equivalencies, reminding reporters that transgender people face the highest risk of violence, contrary to the narratives pushed by some MAGA Republicans.
“Trans people exist. They always existed, and they will continue to exist,” she said. “The truth is the real trans terrorism… is the terror experienced by trans people in this country.”
Ellis also emphasized that this is an issue of civil and human rights, not something abstract — with real consequences.
“Do not treat civil rights as a both sides issue.”
Brian Bond of PFLAG (Parents, Families, and Friends of Lesbians and Gays) framed the FBI’s proposal as a betrayal of American values, calling it “un-American” and “despicable,” while warning that even if it doesn’t immediately affect everyone, it represents a slippery slope.
“Every child in their family, every family member, every neighbor, transgender or not, is affected.”
He added: “PFLAG parents… will not back down.”
Beth Littrell of the Southern Poverty Law Center underscored the constitutional implications of these potential actions, their consequences for other marginalized groups, and the role of the media in calling out the Trump administration’s tactics.
“The real threat is when the government targets a group of people and those who support them for unequal treatment based only on who they are or what they believe,” Littrell said. “It should go without saying, but I say it anyway, transgender children do not threaten anyone’s ability to safely live and thrive in our nation or anywhere else.”
“What is being reported is unconstitutional. What is happening is dangerous,” she added. “We have seen this playbook before… We fought alongside the communities then, we will continue to do so now.”
Advocates closed the call with a unified demand: that political leaders, the media, and the public reject any attempt to label transgender people as extremists and instead hold accountable those responsible for spreading violence and misinformation.
A Texas man accused of threatening to commit a shooting at a local pride event has been arrested by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, according to court documents obtained by CBS News.
Joshua Cole of Anson, Texas, allegedly commented on a Facebook post containing details of an upcoming gay pride event in nearby Abilene, “fk their parade” and said he wanted to “pay them back for taking out Charlie Kirk,” according to an affidavit filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas on Sept. 19 — nine days after the conservative activist was shot and killed in Utah.
Posting under the name “Jay Dubya,” Cole also allegedly wrote, “there’s only like 30 of em we can send a clear message to the rest of them.”
When the Abilene Police Department made a traffic stop on Cole, he admitted he runs a Facebook account under the name Jay Dubya, and that he was behind the comments, the criminal complaint alleged. He told officers that he did not believe that the gay pride event should be allowed, according to the court document, but denied that he was going to shoot parade participants.
Cole also admitted that he has a firearm. It wasn’t clear whether he legally owns it.
“The threats were not conditional. The threats were specific,” FBI Special Agent Samuel C. Venuti wrote in the affidavit. “The threats were also specific to a particular set of victims: people participating in the gay pride parade tomorrow. With this level of specificity, COLE’s comments were not mere idle or careless talk, exaggeration, or something said in only a joking manner.”
Venuti wrote that he visited Cole’s former employer who told him Cole had recently quit his job and “stormed out of the facility in anger.” He had worked for the employer for over a year, Venuti wrote, and was described by coworkers as a “hot head.”
“We want to reassure our community that the safety of everyone at Pride has always been, and will continue to be our top priority,” Abilene Pride Alliance posted on Facebook over a week after the incident. “The swift action and continued diligence of APD and federal partners reflect their commitment to protecting our city and ensuring that Pride remains a safe, inclusive and celebratory space for all.”
Abilene Pride Alliance said in the post that the organization asked for help to strengthen security at Pride and received over $4,000 in donations.
“We want to reassure our community that the safety of everyone at Pride has always been, and will continue to be our top priority,” the post reads. “The swift action and continued diligence of APD and federal partners reflect their commitment to protecting our city and ensuring that Pride remains a safe, inclusive and celebratory space for all.”
CBS News reached out to an attorney listed for Cole. He was booked into Taylor County Jail in Abilene on Sept. 19. He was previously arrested in 2019 on a terroristic threat charge, according to jail records.
Jail records show Cole was released from Taylor County Jail on Sept. 24. The next day, the court concluded that Cole must be detained pending trial for reasons including his prior criminal history, that the weight of evidence against him is strong and that his release poses “serious danger to any person or the community.”
It wasn’t immediately clear whether Cole had been released prior to the decision or whether he was transferred to another facility.
In this powerful interview, Paul – one of our clients who relocated from Texas to a blue state – shares his firsthand experience of why preparation matters. Drawing on his own move, Paul explains why LGBTQ+ individuals and allies living in red states need to think about a “Plan B” now, not later.
From getting passports and wills in order to recognizing the rising risks of scapegoating against the trans and gay communities, Paul delivers clear, actionable advice:
“If you’ve been waiting to press the button to go — press the button.”
“Have an escape plan. And I mean it.”
We also discuss:
How to prepare essential paperwork (passports, wills, vital documents)
What recent events reveal about scapegoating and rising risks
Why safety planning — even down to event logistics — is critical
Lessons learned from unexpected threats, doxxing, and open carry encounters at public events
If you’re wondering whether to stay or leave a red state, or you’re ready to start planning your next steps, this interview will give you practical tools and candid insight to help you make informed decisions.
Watch now and learn how to stay prepared. Don’t wait — take action today.
The President of Texas A&M University, Mark Welsh, resigned last week amid controversy over a viral video between a professor and a student debating gender ideology.
Welsh stepped down officially on Friday, September 19, according to a press release where the Chancellor Glenn Hegar thanked Welsh for his service to the university and the nation.
“President Welsh is a man of honor who has led Texas A&M with selfless dedication,” said Hegar. “We are grateful for his service and contributions. At the same time, we agree that now is the right moment to make a change and to position Texas A&M for continued excellence in the years ahead.”
The former president resigned while the university faces heated backlash after a video was posted of a student calling out a professor for teaching gender ideology in the classroom.
Professor Melissa McCoul was sharing an image of a “gender unicorn” that demonstrates concepts of gender expressions, identity and sexuality while reading “Jude Saves the World,” a novel about a 12-year-old who comes out as nonbinary, according to The Texas Tribune.
“[M]y Administration will defend women’s rights and protect freedom of conscience by using clear and accurate language and policies that recognize women are biologically female, and men are biologically male,” Trump wrote in the executive order.
State Rep. Brian Harrison, R-Texas, reposted the video on X.
“The governor and lieutenant governor and speaker have been telling everybody for two years now that we passed bans on DEI and transgender indoctrination in public universities,” Harrison wrote on his X account. “The only little problem with that? It’s a complete lie. … The state of Texas — despite what the governor said in his tweet yesterday, that this is a violation of law — there is no state law that we passed.”
Professor McCoul was later fired, according to press reports.
Former A&M President Welsh allegedly defended the inclusion of LGBTQ content in the classroom.
“Those people don’t get to pick who their clients are, what citizens they serve and they want to understand the issues affecting the people that they’re going to treat,” Welsh said in an audio recording posted by Harrison on X. “So there is a professional reason to teach some of these courses.”
In the past few years, Texas has been one of many states fighting LGBTQ and diversity, equity and inclusion efforts in schools.
Slovakia’s parliament, has approved a sweeping constitutional amendment that legally recognizes only two sexes—male and female, and imposes new limits on adoption and surrogacy, sparking alarm from human rights groups and LGBTQ+ advocates.
The amendment, passed in a narrow 90‑vote majority in the 150‑seat National Council, also restricts adoption to married heterosexual couples and bans surrogate pregnancies. It was framed by Prime Minister Robert Fico’s government as a defense of “sovereignty in cultural and ethical matters” and traditional values. Fico heralded the vote as “a great dam against progressivism.”
The constitutional change marks one of the most significant curbs yet on LGBTQ+ and reproductive rights in the country, critics say, aligning Slovakia more closely with Hungary’s conservative trajectory, and raising concerns about violations of international commitments and human rights.
What the Law Does
Defining Sex and Gender: The amendment states explicitly that only two sexes—male and female—are recognized under Slovak law. Legal definitions of gender identity beyond that framework are excluded.
Adoption Restrictions: Only married heterosexual couples will now be able to adopt children. Same‑sex couples are excluded from adoption rights under the new wording.
Ban on Surrogacy: The law prohibits surrogate pregnancies.
Assertion of “National Identity”: The amendment declares that Slovakia retains sovereignty over issues of national identity, culture, and state ethics, even potentially above European Union law in certain areas.
Passage and Political Dynamics
The vote was precariously close. Fico’s coalition controls fewer than the 90 votes required for constitutional amendments, but 12 opposition lawmakers from conservative parties defected last minute, providing the margin required for passage.
Some opposition figures expressed outrage, describing defectors as traitors, alleging the vote was a political maneuver to distract from declining public approval and other unpopular measures.
President Peter Pellegrini said he would sign the amendment into law, framing the constitutional majority as a signal of political consensus in deeply polarized times.
Responses and Broader Implications
Human rights organizations were quick to condemn the change. Critics warn it will lengthen the legal limbo for trans, non‑binary, and intersex people, reduce access to gender recognition, and further institutionalize discrimination.
There are also worries it will lead to clashes with EU law, which guarantees certain protections for minority and LGBTQ+ populations. Legal scholars suggest the amendments may violate international treaties and could become the subject of legal challenges.
For Slovak LGBTQ+ individuals, the change is deeply personal. It removes recognition for anyone who doesn’t fit neatly into “male” or “female,” and restricts family formation for non‑heterosexual parents.
New York lawmakers are demanding that Amtrak police stop arresting LGBTQ people on charges of public lewdness in a men’s bathroom at Penn Station, likening the crackdown to “the Stonewall era.”
The letter from Rep. Jerrold Nadler, two state senators and a state assemblymember follows reports by Gothamist and The City that 200 people have been arrested since June for alleged public lewdness or indecent exposure in the bathroom. At least 20 of those people were immigrants transferred to ICE custody after the arrest, law enforcement officials said.
“We demand that Amtrak Police immediately cease identifying and targeting members of the LGBTQ community for search, seizure and arrest on the basis of their perceived sexual orientation or gender identity,” the lawmakers wrote to Amtrak President Roger Harris. “While Amtrak is entitled to ensure that its facilities are not used for illicit purposes, we do not believe Amtrak should be doing so with a hostile arrest campaign reminiscent of anti-LGBTQ policing from the Stonewall era.”
State Sens. Brad Hoylman-Sigal and Liz Krueger, and Assemblymember Tony Simone, who all represent parts of Manhattan, also signed the letter.
The crackdown involved undercover officers posted in the bathrooms at urinals or in stalls, looking for men meeting up for anonymous sex. A cruising app called “Sniffies” featured a group dedicated to the bathroom. In recent weeks it featured numerous men warning others to avoid the bathroom because of the police presence.
The lawmakers alleged police were using “questionable and potentially discriminatory tactics.”
The lawmakers requested a meeting with Amtrak police to discuss the issue. The surge in enforcement comes as President Donald Trump’s administration has taken over the redevelopment of Penn Station from the MTA.
“As you may know, there is a long and painful tradition of police forces using loitering, identification, prostitution, lewdness and similar laws to target LGBTQ people for harassment, arrest and incarceration,” the letter read.
Amtrak Deputy Police Chief Martin Conway previously said the arrests came in response to complaints from customers. Amtrak spokesperson Jason Abrams said incidents at Penn Station have declined since the enforcement surge.
“Amtrak remains committed to maintaining a safe and welcoming environment for all travelers and will continue to monitor conditions closely, making adjustments as needed to uphold the highest standards of security,” Abrams said.
Texas enacts controversial “bathroom bill” into law
By Marissa Armas
Updated on: September 27, 2025 / 1:01 PM CDT / CBS Texas
It’s a controversial new law that’s drawing sharp criticism from LGBTQ advocates across Texas.
Gov. Greg Abbott officially signed the so-called “bathroom bill” on Monday. While some are applauding the move, others say it unfairly targets transgender people and others.
On Monday, Abbott signed Senate Bill 8 into law, which requires people in government buildings and schools to use certain facilities based on the sex they were assigned at birth.
Impact on public institutions statewide
The law applies to restrooms, locker rooms, and other changing facilities in public schools, universities, prisons, jails, and other government-owned buildings. It also limits which family violence shelters transgender people can access.
The only exceptions are for children under 10 accompanied by an adult, as well as custodians, law enforcement, and medical workers.
Community leaders express concern
Because of the new law, community engagement strategist Gordy Carmona is having tough conversations with many of the people they serve.
“It’s just heartbreaking,” said Carmona. “I know how it’s going to impact so many of the people that I care about that I know, both personally and professionally.”
Brad Pritchett, CEO of Equality Texas, said the law’s intent is clear.
“Even though the letter of this law is plainly written, the intent of the law is really about trying to keep transgender, nonbinary, and intersex Texans from being able to participate in public life here in the state of Texas,” Pritchett said.
Supporters call it ‘common sense’
Abbott posted a video Monday about the bill signing, saying, “I signed a law banning men in women’s restrooms. It is a common-sense public safety issue.”
State Rep. Angelia Orr echoed that message, saying, “Let’s hope more states follow suit. This is common sense policy to protect the women and girls of Texas!”
Enforcement details remain unclear
Pritchett said there are still many questions about how the law will be enforced.
“We don’t really know what cities or school districts, or political subdivisions are going to do to try to enforce this bill,” said Pritchett. “There are things that are reasonable, and there are things that are unreasonable, and our goal is to ensure that no unreasonable things are taking place, with regards to how people are accessing essential spaces for themselves.”
Fines target institutions, not individuals
While individuals won’t be fined for violating the law, institutions can face steep penalties — $5,000 for a first offense and up to $125,000 for subsequent violations
Last month, it was reported that the Supreme Court will formally consider a petition for a case calling on them to overturn their 2015 ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges, the historic ruling that made gay marriage legal nationwide. The petition comes from former Kentucky county clerk Kim Davis, who has made headlines and been embroiled in legal battles since she refused to sign marriage licenses for gay couples.
While Davis has been fighting against gay marriage since it was made legal, her lawyers have been doing it for longer. Davis is being represented by Liberty Counsel, a far-right Christian legal group and Southern Poverty Law Center-designated anti-LGBTQ hate group.
Since its inception in 1989, the group has opposed gay rights causes, including fighting against gay marriage, the legalization of homosexuality, and bans onconversion therapy. In one instance, the group’s Facebook cover photoreferenced the Bible verse Leviticus 20:13, which reads, “If a man has sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They are to be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.”
When asked about the cover photo, the group responded in an email that “Liberty Counsel has never promoted or condoned the killing of anyone or asked anyone to ‘like’ any quote about killing gays.”
Experts say Liberty Counsel is arguably more powerful than ever in 2025, fueled by publicity from Davis’ case and the opportunity to capitalize on a moment when American politics are stacked toward the right-wing—something that could upend gay marriage.
“The alignments will never be as favorable as they are at this moment,” Anne Nelson, author of “Shadow Network: Media, Money, and the Secret Hub of the Radical Right,” told Uncloseted Media. “That’s why they’re going for broke.”
History
Liberty Counsel was founded by preacher turned lawyer Mat Staver and his wife, Anita.
Mat Staver, who now serves as the chairman, senior pastor, and primary spokesperson for the group, authored the 2004 book “Same-sex Marriage: Putting Every Household at Risk,” where he wrote that “homosexuality is rooted in fractured emotions” and “a common thread in virtually every case is some sort of sexual or emotional brokenness.”
While the organization started operations solely in Florida, Mat Staver told the Orlando Sentinel shortly after Liberty Counsel launched that the group “would be a Christian antithesis to the ACLU” and that he “always felt the Lord calling [him] to combine [ministry and law] together.”
Liberty Counsel was active throughout the 1990s, with a focus on First Amendment cases, but Staver and his group didn’t gain national attention until 1994, when he argued before the Supreme Court for a case that challenged the constitutionality of a Florida court ruling that barred anti-abortion protests outside of a clinic. Some parts of the ruling were successfully overturned while others remained in place.
After that, the group built up a reputation for taking up cases related to religion in schools and other public institutions, including one instance where they threatened a lawsuit against one school for changing the lyrics of a Christmas song in a school play.
Attacking Gay Rights
After the turn of the century, Liberty Counsel became more active on gay issues. In 2003, they filed an amicus brief in Lawrence v. Texas, the case that decriminalized gay sex nationwide, arguing in favor of state laws banning it by saying that “deregulating human sexual relations will erode the institution of marriage.”
When California was taken to court over Proposition 8, a 2008 state constitutional amendment that sought to ban gay marriage in the state, Liberty Counsel attempted to be among the lawyers defending it. The group publicly criticized fellow far-right Christian legal group Alliance Defending Freedom for, in their view, arguing the case poorly.
One lawyer for Liberty Counsel also disagreed with legal positions taken by one pro-Prop 8 lawyer, who reportedly refused to argue that homosexuality is an “illness or disorder.” In their amicus brief in support of the proposition, Liberty Counsel argued that homosexuality “presents serious physical, emotional, mental, and other health-related risks.”
And in 2015, just months before the Obergefell ruling, the group offered to represent Alabama judges who refused to perform gay marriages after a state ban was overturned.
Once gay marriage became legal nationwide, Liberty Counsel took up Kim Davis’ case, which brought them more media attention than ever before.
“Kim Davis was a boon to Liberty Counsel,” says Peter Montgomery, research director at People for the American Way, an advocacy group aimed at challenging the far right. “[She] got them a huge amount of publicity, and I think they’ve really grown since they first took up her case.”
Much of the earned media from the Davis case, however, was negative. Liberty Counsel received criticism for encouraging Davis to continue refusing gay marriage licenses in violation of a court order. And even a Fox News panel of legal experts called Davis a “hypocrite” and Mat Staver’s legal arguments “stunningly obtuse” and “ridiculously stupid.”
In an email to Uncloseted Media, Liberty Counsel took issue with criticism of the group’s past litigation, writing that “[they] have 40 wins [they] briefed or argued at the US Supreme Court, including a 9-0 win in Shurtleff v. City of Boston.”
Liberty Counsel has created their own media, including a daily 11-minute radio broadcast, Faith and Freedom. Launched in 2010, the program is syndicated on 145 stations across the country and frequently contains anti-LGBTQ rhetoric, including assertions that LGBTQ-inclusive policies in the Boy Scouts create “a playground for pedophiles”; that gay people “know intuitively that what they are doing is immoral, unnatural, and self-destructive”; and that gay people are “not controlled by reason,” but rather “controlled by … lust.”
And after being boosted in popularity by Kim Davis, a 2016 CBS News investigation found that the group had worked with lawmakers in at least 20 states to author anti-LBGTQ bills, including trans bathroom bans.
“They’re pretty much anti-LGBT in every way you can be,” Montgomery told Uncloseted Media. “Staver is pretty shameless in lying about gay people and the laws.”
Why Now?
Davis’ case has fallen in and out of public attention over the years, with the Supreme Court rejecting a previous petition in 2020. Despite this, Liberty Counsel has remained confident in the case’s potential to upend gay marriage. In 2023, the group told their supporters in an email that they planned to use Davis’ case to persuade the Supreme Court to overturn Obergefell. These comments came a year after Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas expressed interest in reconsidering Obergefell in his opinion on the case that overturned Roe v. Wade.
“[The far right have] been working for decades to get their pieces in place, so at this particular moment, looking at the chessboard, they’ve got a critical mass of conservative states with Republicans in the state house, they’ve got the White House, they’ve got both houses of Congress, and they’ve got a majority on the Supreme Court,” says Nelson. “In a year, that could change.”
Increasing Notoriety
Montgomery says that Liberty Counsel’s popularity and influence has been on the rise since the start of the pandemic, when the group gained traction by opposing restrictions on churches meeting during COVID lockdowns. During this period, Staver claimed that COVID-19 vaccines are designed to “prevent people from procreating.”
“One of the ways that [Staver] has boosted his visibility and influence was riding that parade, which a number of people on the religious right did, and took advantage of the resentment of public health restrictions,” says Montgomery.
Since then, the group has falsely claimed that the Respect for Marriage Act “would allow pedophiles to marry children,” and Staver wrote in a newsletter that “the LGBTQ agenda seeks nothing less than to eliminate all religious freedom rights that might make them feel bad about their choices.”
In the meantime, affiliates of the group have been cozying up to the Supreme Court. In 2022, a representative of the Liberty Counsel-owned D.C. ministry Faith & Liberty was caught bragging about praying with Supreme Court justices just weeks after the court overturned Roe v. Wade. Staver told Rolling Stone these allegations are “entirely untrue.”
In his majority opinion on the case, Justice Alito cited an amicus brief filed by Liberty Counsel where the group argues that “the birth control and abortion movements are racist and eugenic.”
Part of a Bigger Picture
Liberty Counsel’s website reports that it generated nearly $28 million in revenue between July 1, 2023 and June 30, 2024. While their internal team has roughly 40 employees listed on LinkedIn, they have claimed to have anywhere from 90 to 700 affiliate attorneys across the country. Some of the group’s larger and more consistent donors reportedly include fracking baron Farris Wilks; the Christian TV network Good Life Broadcasting; and Liberty University, where Staver previously worked as dean of the law school.
“The big Christian nationalist and plutocratic donors understand that the Supreme Court, and the judiciary in general, are central to their aims … so over the past few decades they spent enormous sums grooming and promoting candidates for the judiciary whose interpretation of the law is favorable to their interests,” Katherine Stewart, an author and expert on religious nationalism, told Uncloseted Media in an email. “Liberty Counsel has successfully positioned itself as one of the players in that space. It only picks up a slice from the total pie, but the pie is so well-funded that even a slice is rich indeed.”
Beyond this, Liberty Counsel is affiliated with a number of other right-wing groups, several of which operate directly under the group’s umbrella. Staver holds leadership positions in other conservative groups, including Salt & Light Council and National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference—the former of which has been outspokenly anti-LGBTQ. Liberty Counsel is also a member of the Remnant Alliance, a coalition of groups known for coordinating to elect Christian nationalist candidates to local school boards. A leaked membership directory from 2020 also listed Staver as a member of the Council for National Policy, a secretive group that includes Republican politicians and major leaders of Christian right organizations, though Staver told Uncloseted Media that Liberty Counsel and the Council for National Policy are not affiliated.
Nelson says connections like these allow different groups on the far right to coordinate together on anti-LGBTQ policies.
“They’ll have coordinated messaging about whatever campaign they’re launching at the moment. And it’s highly coordinated, as in the same story, the same language, the same spokespeople. It’s really quite impressive. And so all of a sudden there’ll be a story that will just erupt.”
The Council for National Policy did not respond to a request for comment.
When Liberty Counsel filed its most recent petition for Davis’ case to the Supreme Court, multiple right-wing media outlets whose leadership have been members of the Council for National Policy quickly covered the story with a favorable spin, including Salem Media Group, the WashingtonTimes and WorldNetDaily. And earlier this year, Staver networked at the National Religious Broadcasters conference, where he discussed plans to overturn Obergefell.
Montgomery says that this coordination is especially powerful because different groups are able to influence different spheres. For example, while Liberty Counsel pressures the courts, a group like Salt & Light Council works to activate supporters in ministry.
“They have this broader vision of wanting to change the culture and change the country,” he says. “They are all different approaches to moving the country in the direction they want: courts, legislative advocacy, lobbying, organizing, and media outreach.”
Nelson says the far right’s recent legal success is thanks in part to the influx of right-wing judges since the start of Trump’s first term.
“It’s worked initially with trying to get local and political opposition to these laws, and it’s linked to getting the appointments of judges who’ve had to pass a litmus test,” she says. “And then [their strategy involves] mounting the lawsuits, starting usually at the state level and working their way up the court system, specializing in states where they believe they’ll have sympathetic judges. … It’s gaming [the system].”
In an email to Uncloseted Media, Liberty Counsel says this characterization does not describe their litigation strategy.
What Does This Mean for Marriage Equality?
Despite all of this, many legal experts believe that this latest challenge to marriage equality is a long shot. Liberty Counsel’s arguments were largely rejected by a federal appeals court panel earlier this year, and several of the justices have shown little to no interest in revisiting Obergefell. Just this month, conservative Justice Amy Coney Barrett wrote that the right to marriage is “fundamental” and called for people to “tune … out” concerns about gay marriage being overturned.
However, given the current political moment, Nelson says that the threat to Obergefell should not be underestimated.
“This long-range strategy is coming to fruition, and a lot of the pieces are in place,” she says. “Under the current circumstances, with the current judiciary, they’ve got a reasonable chance of allowing states to ban same-sex marriages on a state level with an eye towards eventually banning it [on a nationwide level] in the future.”
You must be logged in to post a comment.