Mark Bray, an assistant professor of history at Rutgers University who was nicknamed “Dr. Antifa” by students, left the U.S. for Spain Thursday night due to death threats he has received after he was accused of antifa membership.
The campus chapter of Turning Point USA and other conservative groups accused Bray of involvement with antifa and started a petition to get him fired, The Associated Press reported.
Bray has studied the history of the left and is considered an expert in anti-fascist movements but denies any involvement with antifa, which the Trump administration has labeled as a terrorist organization
“I am not now, nor have I ever been, part of any kind of antifascist or anti-racist organization – I just haven’t. I’m a professor,” Bray told The Guardian.
He took off on Thursday for Spain from Newark Liberty International Airport with his family, according to his social media, after initially being told his reservation had been canceled.
Conservative students labeled Bray a danger to campus.
“You have a teacher that so often promotes political violence, especially in his book ‘Antifa: The Anti-Fascist Handbook,’ which talks about militant fascism, which is on term with political violence,” student Megyn Doyle told Fox News.
The Hill has reached out to Rutgers for comment.
Conservatives said Bray donated to antifa when he committed 50 percent “of the author’s proceeds would go to the International Anti-Fascist Defense fund” from his 2017 book.
He countered those funds go “to help with the legal or medical costs of people facing charges for organizing pertaining to anti-fascism or anti-racism” and that the antifa group referenced does not have a centralized committee or leader, according to The Guardian.
Bray said the threats to him picked up with the petition and President Trump’s executive order to designate antifa as a terrorist group, prompting him to leave the country.
In his order, Trump said antifa is a “domestic terrorist organization” and gave the government authority to investigate anyone who provides “material support” to the group.
“Individuals associated with and acting on behalf of Antifa further coordinate with other organizations and entities for the purpose of spreading, fomenting, and advancing political violence and suppressing lawful political speech,” the order states. “This organized effort designed to achieve policy objectives by coercion and intimidation is domestic terrorism.”
When Bray first tried to leave the country with his family on Wednesday, they were not allowed on the plane and their reservation was canceled.
“‘Someone’ cancelled my family’s flight out of the country at the last second,” Bray posted on Bluesky. “We got our boarding passes. We checked our bags. Went through security. Then at our gate our reservation ‘disappeared.’”
The news he was trying to leave the country was first reported by NJ.com. The airline rescheduled them for the Thursday flight, which they successfully boarded.
Turning Point says it doesn’t support threats or doxing to any person, but students who have rallied in support of Bray are calling for its Rutgers chapter to be shut down.
“The Rutgers chapter of Turning Point USA (TPUSA) has been continuously promoting hate speech and inciting violence against our community. This disturbing behavior has created a toxic environment that has already led to tragic consequences,” a petition against the chapter reads.
The Hill has reached out to Turning Point for comment.
Texas Gov. Greg Abbott is calling for the removal of rainbow crosswalks and other symbols of pride from public roads across Texas, saying they pose safety concerns and misuse taxpayer dollars.
“Texans expect their taxpayer dollars to be used wisely, not advance political agendas on Texas roadways,” Abbott said in a statement Wednesday.
He directed the Texas Department of Transportation to ensure all cities and counties “remove any and all political ideologies from our streets” within 30 days. Any city that does not comply, he said, could risk the “withholding or denial of state and federal road funding and suspension of agreements with TxDOT.”
“To keep Texans moving safely and free from distraction, we must maintain a safe and consistent transportation network across Texas,” Abbott said.
Advocates say the rainbow crosswalks in Dallas’ Oak Lawn neighborhood have always been privately funded.
“No taxpayer dollars were used. We didn’t want to access those funds, even if we were able to,” said Valerie Jackson, chair‑elect of the North Texas LGBTQ Chamber of Commerce.
Jackson said the project was funded through private donations and community events such as wine walks. She added that organizers worked with Texas Department of Transportation and the City of Dallas to ensure the designs met state safety standards.
“We agree with the governor and the administration that public safety is paramount, and we would not move forward with this project and the experience that we’ve had over the last five years by endangering people,” Jackson said.
Annise Parker, the former Houston mayor and one of the first openly LGBTQ mayors of a major American city, said she was “surprised that the governor has so little to do that erasing rainbow crosswalks has become his priority.”
“I trust that businesses and individuals across Texas will proudly display rainbow flags in response and continue to focus on real issues,” she told NBC News.
Parker is currently running for Harris County judge.
A couple from Woburn, Massachusetts has lost their license to foster children after they refused to sign a gender affirming policy form from the Department of Children and Families (DCF).
Lydia and Heath Marvin have three kids in their teens, but they have fostered eight different children under the age of 4 since 2020. Their most recent foster child was a baby with complex medical needs who stayed with them for 15 months.
“Our Christian faith, it really drives us toward that. James says that true undefiled religion is to care for the fatherless,” said Heath.
The couple said they were prepared to care for more foster children until DCF pulled their license to foster in April.
Foster parents cite religious beliefs
That’s because the Marvins refused to sign the agency’s LGBTQIA+ Non-Discrimination Policy because of their Christian faith. Starting in 2022, the policy said that foster families must affirm the LGBTQIA+ identity of foster children.
“We asked, is there any sort of accommodation, can you waive this at all? We will absolutely love and support and care for any child in our home but we simply can’t agree to go against our Christian faith in this area. And, were ultimately told you must sign the form as is or you will be delicensed,” Lydia said.
The Marvins appealed the loss of their license, but lost. They’re considering their options but two other Christian foster families are plaintiffs in a federal lawsuit filed by the Massachusetts Family Institute and Alliance Defending Freedom against DCF.
The lawsuit alleges the policy forces parents to “accept[ ] a child’s assertion of their LGBTQIA+ identity”, “address[ ] children by their names and pronouns,” and “support[ ] gender-neutral practices regarding clothes and physical appearance.”
“There is a speech component and also a religious liberty component to the lawsuit,” said Sam Whiting, an attorney with the Massachusetts Family Institute.
Letter from Trump administration
Last week, the Trump administration sent a letter to DCF, addressing the lawsuit and specifically mentioning the Marvins.
“These policies and developments are deeply troubling, clearly contrary to the purpose of child welfare programs, and in direct violation of First Amendment protections,” wrote Andrew Gradison, Acting Assistant Secretary for the Administration for Children and Families.
LGBTQ+ advocates argue the policy was developed to protect kids. Massachusetts foster parents also receive a monthly stipend.
“The state has an obligation to children to make sure that they’re safe and well protected. And foster parents, they’re not parents. Foster parents are temporary. They’re a stop gap to make sure children can safely go back to their families of origin,” said Polly Crozier, Director of Family Advocacy at GLBTQ Legal Advocates and Defenders.
Data collection by DCF is poor but a report by the Massachusetts Commission on LGBTQ youth suggests that roughly 30 percent of foster children in the state could identify as LGBTQ, similar to data collected in California and New York.
The Marvins argue that DCF has been flexible about child placements in the past for a number of reasons.
“We would love and care and support any child but if there was an issue where we knew that we would have a different position than DCF, we would just be open and talk to them about it,” Heath said.
A DCF spokesperson said in a statement to WBZ-TV, “The Department does not comment on matters related to pending litigation.”
Librarian Terri Lesley said she endured years of “pure hell” fighting to keep embattled books on the public library shelves of Gillette, a deeply conservative coal town in northeastern Wyoming.
After getting fired, Lesley fought two more years alleging public officials wrongfully terminated her for refusing to bow to their demands for censorship — all while being threatened, failing to find another librarian job and suffering so much stress she lost sleep and hair.
Now, the 62-year-old’s legal fight is over. On Wednesday, Lesley, who worked for Campbell County Public Library System for 27 years, including 11 as executive director, agreed to settle her federal lawsuit against Campbell County, the county’s library board and several officials for $700,000. In a 78-page complaint filed in April in the U.S. District Court for Wyoming, she accused them of helping to wage a years-long campaign to bully her into removing books about race and LGBTQ+ people from the library. After she refused, she said they fired her, which led to her lawsuit.
“I wanted to take a stand on it and try to put up a barrier from it happening to other librarians,” Lesley said Thursday in an interview. “I thought, ‘If I don’t do this thing, it’s just going to keep happening.’”
Campbell County, the county’s public library board, county commissioners and the lawyers who defended them against Lesley’s suit did not respond to requests for comment from The Washington Post. In court filings, they denied Lesley’s allegations and said she was fired because of “concerns with her performance,” not in retaliation for engaging in constitutionally protected activity. They described her lawsuit as “an improper run-on narrative combining fact, fable, self-praise, and a self-heroic, tale.”
The controversy in Campbell County happened amid a larger movement to target content available in public libraries around the country, particularly those aimed at children and having to do with race, gender or sexual identity. For years, the number of “book challenges” — efforts to remove or restrict access to books — remained flat. But in 2021, challenges spiked 1,300 percent to more than 3,900, according to American Library Association data. They increased each of the next two years to more than 9,000 in 2023 before falling to about 5,800 last year.
School libraries experienced the same thing during that stretch, leading the free-speech nonprofit PEN America to declare book censorship in the United States “rampant and common” and “unprecedented in modern times.”
“Not since the 1950s McCarthy era of the Red Scare has censorship become so entrenched in schools,” the group said Wednesday in a news release, referring to the period when anti-Communist paranoia intensified to a fever pitch.
Campbell County was part of the first wave of the “book-banning craze engulfing the country” in 2021 when several residents demanded county commissioners and library board trustees censor young adult and children’s books with LGBTQ+ content, according to Lesley’s lawsuit.
Those critics denounced books such as “This Book Is Gay” and “Not My Idea: A Book About Whiteness” as pornographic, obscene or racist. When Lesley resisted pressure to transfer such books out of the young adult and children’s sections or remove them from the library altogether, they targeted her for roughly two years, threatening her and accusing of criminal activity and endangering children, according to her lawsuit.
Instead of defending Lesley from that “campaign of fear and hate,” two county commissioners and four library board trustees allegedly joined it. In doing so, commissioners and trustees alienated LGBTQ+ people and propagated the hateful ideology that they are “dangers, abnormal, unwelcome, and their voices should be suppressed,” the suit states.
Over the next two years, Lesley kept resisting attempts to remove or restrict various books with LGBTQ+ themes, saying at library board meetings that doing so constituted censorship and violated the First Amendment, the suit states. Several lawyers agreed with that legal interpretation, which they shared with board trustees and county commissioners, according to the suit.
At one library board meeting, one of Lesley’s critics held up a sign that read “[Campbell County Public Library] Knowingly Encourages SEX for Minors and that’s a crime,” the suit alleges.
Amid the controversy, the American Library Association in March 2022 announced Lesley had won the John Phillip Immroth Memorial Award that recognizes “notable contributions to intellectual freedom and demonstrations of personal courage in defense of freedom of expression.”
Over the next five months, four of five library board members were replaced by county commissioners with ones more inclined to remove or restrict LGBTQ+ books, the suit states.
In July 2023, the library board voted to terminate Lesley.
“Their actions not only devastated Ms. Lesley professionally and personally, but also undermined the very mission of [the library system] and inflicted harm on the broader community,” the suit states. “For this, they must be held responsible.”
Lesley said she continues to be harmed by officials’ actions. More than two years after being fired, she hasn’t gotten a job in her field. A resident of Gillette since the second grade, she’s unwilling to move. She sought remote work in the field that wouldn’t require face-to-face interactions with patrons, but none of her efforts panned out.
Still, Lesley said she doesn’t regret standing up for what she believes was right, even if she’s paid a heavy price. She said she hopes the $700,000 settlement — more than five times what the county paid her annually — deters officials elsewhere from meddling with which books go on library shelves and where.
“They’ll see what happened here and maybe reconsider going down that road,” she said, with a pause, “is what I’m hoping for.”
Life for LGBTQ+ people has gotten worse since Donald Trump was elected for a second term — and they’re been forced to make major changes to protect themselves.
Since the November election, the majority (57 percent) of LGBTQ+ people — including 84 percent of transgender and nonbinary people — have made significant life decisions, according to a new report from the Movement Advancement Project. This includes considering or actually moving to a different state, considering or actually finding a different job, attempting to update legal name or gender markers on identity documents, and crossing state lines to receive medical care.
While nearly half of all trans people (43 percent) and one quarter of all LGBTQ+ people (25 percent) have considered moving to a different state, only 9 percent of trans people and 5 percent of all LGBTQ+ people report they’ve actually moved since November.
Part of what is forcing their hands is the increased discrimination and violence against queer people, as 60 percent of LGBTQ+ people, including 82 percent of trans and nonbinary people, report that they or an immediate family member have had at least one negative experience related to being LGBTQ+ since the November, 2024 election.
Trans respondents reported these experiences nearly twice as often as all LGBTQ+ respondents, with 56 percent saying they or an immediate family member have been discriminated against due to being LGBTQ+, and 53 percent saying they have been harassed online.
Six in 10 LGBTQ+ people say they are worried about the impacts of Trump’s anti-LGBTQ+ policies on them or their families. For trans people, the number is nine in 10. Trans people are also significantly more likely to say they are “very worried,” with 60 percent agreeing compared to 36 percent of all LGBTQ+ people.
“As political attacks on LGBTQ people by federal, state, and local governments continue into the future, it is likely that these impacts will only accumulate,” the report concludes. “While the survey illustrates some of the many ways LGBTQ people are taking action to protect not only themselves but also their broader community, it is vital that people beyond LGBTQ people join in these efforts to protect their LGBTQ neighbors, friends, and family members, and to stop the ongoing attacks on LGBTQ people.”
An estimated 3.6 million LGBTQ+ people over the age of 50 live in the United States, and by 2030, that number will grow to 7 million. Despite those growing numbers, LGBTQ+ older adults continue to face inequities in health care, housing, and economic security due to discrimination and stigmatization from legislators, elder care workers, and medical professionals, as well as a lack of access to culturally competent healthcare and gender-affirming care.
Because all of these factors contribute to higher rates of depression, dementia, and chronic health conditions among queer elders, the need for queer-inclusive senior housing is rising. As such, the need for dedicated LGBTQ+-affirming retirement communities is more than a luxury — it’s a necessity.
Why inclusive senior housing matters
The aforementioned inequities are compounded by the fact that LGBTQ+ seniors are twice as likely to live alone and four times less likely to have children than their heterosexual peers, creating an even greater reliance on supportive housing solutions. This lack of traditional family support, combined with a lifetime of stigma and discrimination, can make aging especially isolating.
According to SAGE (Services & Advocacy for GLBT Elders), LGBTQ+ seniors in elder care facilities have been denied the right to share a room with their partner, pressured to hide their identities, or mistreated by staff unfamiliar with queer lives. The fear of going “back in the closet” in a care facility remains a real and painful possibility.
Inclusive retirement communities aim to address these challenges by:
Ensuring cultural competency training for staff: including the use of affirming language and pronouns; asking respectful and open-ended questions about relationships and family; understanding why LGBTQ+ people might not want to disclose their identities; and acknowledging the unique economic, social, physical, and mental healthcare needs (and relationship styles) of aging queers.
Creating environments where residents can live openly and authentically: Providing awareness training to help facility staff recognize and minimize implicit biases in themselves, their professional colleagues, and other facility residents; teaching community members how to respectfully engage with LGBTQ+ people; and providing various opportunities for LGBTQ+ residents to seek support.
Building spaces for social connection and belonging: Creating community events and opportunities to express and explore queerness through socializing, learning, and artistic engagement; providing a mediator, counselor, office, or ombudsman to assess/address any LGBTQ+ community needs; understanding how isolation and discrimination can uniquely affect queer seniors.
These factors are critical for both the mental and physical health of older LGBTQ+ adults.
LGBTQ+ retirement homes across the U.S.
While the number of communities remains relatively small compared to mainstream options, there are now dedicated LGBTQ+ senior housing developments and retirement villages in multiple states. Here are 21 around the United States:
Many of these developments include independent living, assisted living, or affordable housing options —reflecting the diversity of financial and medical needs among LGBTQ+ elders.
Alternatives to dedicated LGBTQ+ retirement communities
Not every queer elder has access to a specialized retirement community, but there are other options:
LGBTQ+-friendly senior living facilities: More mainstream retirement communities are adopting anti-discrimination policies, staff training, and LGBTQ+ resident programming.
Inclusive cities: Urban areas with strong LGBTQ+ networks — such as San Francisco, Chicago, Atlanta, and Philadelphia — often provide supportive social services and affirming healthcare options, especially through their queer community centers or others elder care services.
Looking ahead
The U.S. is on the cusp of a demographic shift. By 2030, all Baby Boomers will be over the age of 65, and that includes millions of openly LGBTQ+ adults. Ensuring they can age with dignity requires policy changes, cultural shifts, and investment in inclusive housing.
LGBTQ+ retirement communities represent one part of the solution. They offer safety, visibility, and belonging at a stage of life when many people need it most. But expanding access — through both dedicated communities and wider adoption of affirming practices in mainstream senior housing —remains essential.
A student activist at Louisiana State University in Baton Rouge says her arrest at a campus public hearing was a targeted attack based on her political views, and alleges police became menacing when they learned she’s transgender.
Gabriela Juárez, 20, was swarmed by campus police after she exceeded her allotted speaking time of three minutes at a campus presidential search forum last week.
At least a dozen other students leapt from their seats in support of Juárez as LSU cops dragged her from the room, Louisiana Illuminator reports.
Six other students were charged with misdemeanors and released from the campus police station after they blocked the police car taking Juárez away.
Juárez was charged with resisting arrest and “interference with educational process,” which is a felony. She was taken to East Baton Rouge Parish Prison.
All of the students involved are members of the LSU chapter of Students for a Democratic Society. The group claims Louisiana Gov. Jeff Landry (R) is secretly steering the process to hire the university’s next president to align with the governor’s far-right, Trump-inspired political agenda, while disenfranchising campus leaders, faculty and students.
Several students at the forum wore T-shirts with the slogan “No MAGA President.”
LSU cops initially referred to Juárez as “she” or “her,” the activist said in an interview, but began treating her differently when she shared her legal name. Then they turned hostile and referred to her as “he” and “him,” she said.
At the parish prison, Juárez was strip-searched and forced to stand naked while officers discussed where she should be kept.
“They said to the officer, ‘I have someone here who is bottom parts male but up top fully female,’” Juárez recounted. “And so they had no idea what to do with me.”
Juárez said she was put into a cell by herself and given a women’s uniform, along with a warning she’d be sexually assaulted anywhere else. Other cops interrogated Juárez about her gender and loudly referred to her as a man, she said.
Juárez said she was denied the opportunity for a phone call after her arrest, but fellow SDS members were able to post a $1000 bond to obtain her release late the same night.
The meeting that led to Juárez’s arrest was chaotic.
She and six other members of SDS made public comments, eviscerating the 20 search committee members and calling them illegitimate.
Several made profane comments, including Juárez, who alleged the only criteria for serving on the committee was to “be a millionaire and suck off the governor.”
“Don’t f**king touch me,” Juárez shouted as the first LSU cop grabbed her arm.
“Am I being detained?” she shouted as two officers dragged her out of the room and fellow SDS members shouted down cops and committee members in her support.
“Shame on you!” they shouted after Juárez was removed. Those students were also ejected from the meeting.
Outside, as her fellow SDS members and other students shouted and aimed their phones at officers, Juárez was searched, handcuffed, and placed in the back of an LSU Police cruiser.
Juárez says she was targeted.
“In a moment where they are actively cultivating a panic around the presence of Latinos and the presence of trans people, and especially transgender women,” Juárez said, “I do believe that that – combined with the fact that I have a high profile on campus – led to them wanting to make an example out of me, and wanting to intimidate me specifically, and to use me as a show of force to scare other students into being silent.”
The 20-year-old has political enemies, she said.
In September, Juárez was called out by the Louisiana Republican Party, which demanded that LSU discipline the activist for comments critical of slain conservative podcaster Charlie Kirk.
Juárez shared an Instagram story that referred to Kirk as a “world famous fascist” with the caption “rejoice.”
The Japanese government has expanded legal protections to same-sex couples.
According to The Japan Times, the government has decided to recognise same-sex couples as being in “de facto marriages” under nine additional laws, including the Disaster Condolence Grant law.
This follows a decision earlier this year to extend 24 existing laws – including the Domestic Violence Prevention Act, Land and House Lease Act, Child Abuse Prevention Act, and Public Housing Act – to same-sex couples.
Japan’s LGBTQIA+ community has long been engaged in a battle for marriage equality.
Currently, the country’s constitution defines marriage as “mutual consent between both sexes” and does not recognise marriage equality.
“From the perspective of individual dignity, it can be said that it is necessary to realise the benefits of same-sex couples being publicly recognised through official recognition,” the court said on 20 June.
“Public debate on what kind of system is appropriate for this has not been thoroughly carried out.”
A few months later, a Tokyo court upheld the ruling.
However, despite the court doubling down on its stance, the presiding judge also stated that the lack of a legal system and protections for same-sex couples infringes on their human rights (per CNN).
While the marriage equality movement in Japan has suffered a handful of setbacks, it has also seen a few notable wins over the last three years.
In a world and at a point where LGBTQ rights are under increasing threat, organizations like Rainbow Railroad are delivering life-saving action and offering hope as they do. Founded in 2006 as a grassroots response to the grave needs of LGBTQ individuals facing persecution, Rainbow Railroad has evolved into a global leader in queer humanitarian response. Their mission is clear and critical — to help LGBTQ people escape life-threatening situations and access the safety and freedom they deserve.
The Washington Blade was honored to speak with Latoya Nugent, head of engagement at Rainbow Railroad, a determined advocate and strategist who brings lived experience, passion, and vision to this work. In our conversation, Latoya sheds much-needed light on the evolution of the LGBTQ refugee crisis, the organization’s global impact, and how everyday people can get proactive in supporting LGBTQ asylum seekers and those displaced.
Can you share with us a little bit about Rainbow Railroad and how it was formed?
Rainbow Railroad is a global non-profit organization with offices in New York and Toronto. We were founded in 2006 as a volunteer-led initiative focused on helping LGBTQI+ people at risk find safety. Our primary work supports individuals living in what we call “countries of criminalization” – places where it’s illegal to be LGBTQI+.
We officially registered as a charity in Canada in 2013 and received 501(c)(3) status in the U.S. in 2015. Since then, we’ve grown to a team of about 60 staff working across direct service and advocacy. Our mission is to ensure LGBTQI+ people in danger can access safety and support, while also driving global advocacy to improve conditions on the ground.
Largely because there simply weren’t many organizations doing this work. While humanitarian protection has existed for decades, very few have focused specifically on how forced displacement affects LGBTQI+ people. The persecution faced by our community is often deeply personal and not adequately understood or addressed in global protection systems.
Rainbow Railroad was founded by a group of lawyers in Toronto who witnessed extreme anti-LGBTQI+ violence in Jamaica and the broader Caribbean. They knew a solution was needed to create safe passage for those fleeing persecution. What started as a small initiative has now become a global force, responding to crises like the fall of Kabul, the Chechnya purge in 2017, and the Anti-Homosexuality Act in Uganda.
Because we’ve worked so closely with governments, especially the Canadian government, and have deepened our involvement in global coalitions, our ability to respond at scale has expanded. In 2023, we secured a historic partnership with the Canadian government to provide comprehensive, end-to-end relocation support for LGBTQI+ people. That had never existed before within the humanitarian protection framework.
How has anti-LGBTQ and anti-transgender persecution evolved or intensified in recent years?
We’re seeing a rising, coordinated global movement against LGBTQI+ rights, heavily influenced by some religious and political groups. Alarmingly, some countries that had previously decriminalized LGBTQI+ identities are now reversing progress. Take Trinidad and Tobago, for example.
In 2023, Russia labeled the LGBTQI+ movement as “extremist.” In the U.S., under the current administration, we’ve seen federal resources for LGBTQI+ individuals and organizations stripped away. Websites have removed key information, and funding has been cut.
Globally, trans people are often the first targets, whether through state violence or community aggression. While we saw real progress for a while, a lot of that is now under threat. The movement today is focused on holding the line and preventing further erosion of rights.
What are some of the biggest misconceptions the public holds about LGBTQ refugees and asylum seekers?
A major one is the misunderstanding of how deeply personal the persecution is. Even people working in humanitarian spaces sometimes don’t grasp how intimate and life-threatening the experience is for LGBTQI+ people.
Unlike those fleeing war or natural disasters, circumstances that the world is more conditioned to understand, LGBTQI+ asylum seekers are often met with disbelief. People question their identity, their trauma, and even their right to seek protection.
And because the system isn’t designed with us in mind, many are retraumatized throughout the process. There’s also a lack of data. No one is formally tracking how many displaced people identify as LGBTQI+. So we’re forced to estimate based on global population models, but we believe there are upwards of 11 million LGBTQI+ individuals affected by displacement.
Also, the growing anti-immigrant sentiment worldwide paints refugees as threats, and LGBTQI+ asylum seekers get caught in that same narrative. Many wrongly believe that people choose to be refugees, but no one chooses this. It’s called forced displacement for a reason.
Here in the US, how does misinformation shape asylum policy?
Misinformation leads to policies that don’t reflect reality. If you start by distrusting asylum seekers, you miss their humanity. You see them as burdens or threats, not as people fleeing unimaginable violence.
As federal support gets cut, civil society organizations like Rainbow Railroad have to fill the gaps. But we’re not replacing a government system — we’re trying to patch a sinking ship.
And here’s the truth: LGBTQI+ asylum seekers will continue to arrive in the U.S. because it’s still safer than many of the countries they’re fleeing. Even with rising hostility here, they’re not being chased with machetes, like in parts of Nigeria, Jamaica, or Egypt. That’s the level of danger we’re talking about. And that needs to be understood.
In what ways does the US resettlement system fall short for LGBTQ refugees?
Before the federal program we partnered with was suspended in January 2025, we saw firsthand how the system wasn’t built with LGBTQI+ people in mind.
Most LGBTQI+ individuals relocate alone, often fleeing their own families. Yet the resettlement system assumes people arrive with built-in support networks, which they don’t. That leaves them vulnerable to social isolation and instability from day one.
Making an asylum claim also requires proving you deserve protection, which can be incredibly retraumatizing. You’re forced to provide evidence of your identity and persecution — even when you’ve had to hide both for survival. If you can’t “prove” it, your claim may be denied.
Add language barriers, lack of culturally competent translators, and complex paperwork, and you’ve got a system that’s often inaccessible to the very people it’s meant to help.
Can you tell us about the Communities of Care program? What prompted its creation?
The program launched in 2023 as part of a federal initiative to support LGBTQI+ refugee resettlement in the U.S. We mobilized small groups of volunteers, five or more LGBTQI+ individuals or allies, to support refugees as they settled into their new communities. They helped with housing, employment, education, transportation, and creating a sense of belonging.
When the program was suspended in January, we transformed it. Now, it focuses on supporting asylum seekers already in the U.S., many of whom are struggling without federal support.
We call on three or more volunteers to form a Community Support Team and work with an LGBTQI+ asylum seeker for six months. We train these teams to offer trauma-informed, competent care. It’s a way to create chosen family and rebuild community.
Can you tell us about the Community Access Fund?
That fund directly responds to the reduction in U.S. federal support for displaced LGBTQI+ individuals. We realized that many small, grassroots organizations doing vital work are severely underfunded or entirely volunteer-run.
So we created a pool of funds that these organizations can apply to. The first grantee was actually founded by someone we helped relocate to New York a few years ago. He saw that there were countless LGBTQI+ asylum seekers in NYC without access to community or services and decided to create that support himself.
We’ve supported groups in cities like New York, LA, and D.C., and the impact has been powerful. The fund is all about redistributing resources to the people who need them and who are already doing the work on the ground.
What can the average US citizen do to make a difference for LGBTQ asylum seekers and refugees?
So much! First, consider opening your home. Through our Rainbow Housing Drive, we ask people to offer a spare room or apartment at no cost, below-market, or even market rate, to someone in need.
You can also volunteer to form a Community Support Team with just two other people. Or donate to Rainbow Railroad. Honestly, even $5 helps. If everyone did that, the scale of what we could accomplish would be phenomenal.
We also encourage people to contact their elected officials at the city, state, or federal level. Let them know these issues matter to you. Support campaigns that uplift LGBTQI+ immigrants. Solidarity is powerful, and when we act together, we create real change.
This work can be heavy. As the Head of Engagement, how do you stay motivated?
Self-care is essential. Every morning, I wake up early and walk to work. It clears my mind. I take recovery seriously — emotional, physical, social, creative. Some evenings I turn my bathroom into a mini spa — candles, music, and a long bath. It grounds me.
But what really fuels me is my own journey. I’ve personally benefited from the work Rainbow Railroad does. I know how life-saving it is to be lifted from trauma and relocated somewhere you can truly live. Being part of gifting that to others drives me every day.
Our team is incredible. Resilient, dedicated, and deeply committed. And despite the challenges, we celebrate every win, no matter how small. Every life we help change matters.
Finally, what message of hope would you share with LGBTQ people who are fleeing persecution right now?
Hope is real, and it’s on the other side. There’s an entire global community, an army of people, who may not necessarily know your story, but who are bound together by our identities, understanding the persecution and discrimination that we as a community face. that knowledge makes us committed to doing everything in our power to ensure that everyone, every LGBTQI+ person, can live with not only dignity but also safety.
Trust that army to keep doing the work and to show up in solidarity. It may be difficult tomorrow or even next month, but there’s hope on the other side.
Loudoun County School Board proclamations are typically noncontroversial, but a proclamation recognizing October as LGBTQ+ History Month drew three no votes at the board’s Sept. 30 meeting.
Language in the proclamation says it honors the “history, achievements, and contributions of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer people” and celebrates “the strength, resilience, and impact of the LGBTQ+ community, whose contributions have enriched the cultural, educational, and civic life of Virginia and the world.”
“We reject discrimination based on gender identity, sexual orientation, and gender expression, and instead affirm kindness, acceptance, and respect as the foundation of our learning community,” the proclamation states. “Our school division is stronger when every student and staff member can live authentically and feels a true sense of belonging, and when we embrace the full diversity of our community.”
April Chandler, Algonkian; Linda W. Deans, Broad Run; board Vice Chair Anne P. Donohue, At Large; Arben Istrefi, Sterling; board Chair Melinda M. Mansfield, Dulles; and Sumera Rashid, Little River, voted yes.
Deana L. Griffiths, Ashburn; Karen “Kari” LaBell, Catoctin; and Lauren E. Shernoff, Leesburg, voted no.
The proclamation was initially included in the board’s consent agenda, which has items that are approved en masse.
However, Griffiths, who typically has abstained from voting on proclamations since taking office in 2024, wrote in an email that she moved the proclamation to the regular agenda, so she could speak about why she was voting against it.
“There is a meaningful difference between formally recognizing a group in history and promoting that group for its lifestyle to our students,” Griffiths said at the meeting. “It crosses the line into advocacy and raises serious concerns under the (Trump) executive order protecting our children from inappropriate content in our schools.
“Our communications must remain age appropriate and leave conversations about sensitive information to parents. Schools exist to teach children how to read, write, and think critically. Not engage them in conversations about sexuality at any age where they are far too young to process it.”
The January executive order from President Donald J. Trump that Griffiths referred to says people cannot identify as the opposite sex they were born as. It says the administration will “enforce all sex-protective laws to promote this reality,” including cutting federal funding used to “promote gender ideology.”
The Trump administration said in August it was suspending or terminating funding to Loudoun County Public Schools over its policy allowing transgender students to choose which bathroom or locker room they use. Federal money accounts for about $47 million of the current $2 billion LCPS budget.
Shernoff wrote in an email that some constituents complained to her after she voted for the proclamation last year about the way LGBTQ+ History Month was celebrated in schools. Specifically, their complaints were about how “certain spirit days” were celebrated and the effect on young students.
“I did some research into it and that in conjunction with knowing that LCPS also proclaims LGBTQ+ Pride Month in June, I decided to not support this,” Shernoff said. “I did however support the anti-bullying proclamation which specifically names and protects students based on their gender identity. I remain committed to ensuring all students are protected, safe, and can achieve to their fullest potential.”
LaBell said in an interview that she supported the proclamation last year because it was on the consent agenda and voting against it would’ve meant voting against everything on the agenda.
She said she opposed the proclamation because some of the issues it raises are “too political” to promote in school and might be inappropriate for young students to discuss.
Like Shernoff, LaBell said she voted for the Pride Month and anti-bullying proclamations, but believes one proclamation related to LGBTQ issues annually is enough.
“You want history? Put it in Pride Month,” she said. “It just seems to me it’s being pushed more so than anything else in our school system at this point in time. And it’s a family issue. It shouldn’t be a political issue in our schools.”
Two groups that support LGBTQ rights criticized the rationale of Griffiths, LaBell and Shernoff.
Candice Tuck, an Equality Loudoun board member, said the proclamation isn’t about promoting sexuality.
“There have been many brave queer pioneers throughout history who have fought for civil rights, who have been inventors, and who have moved our democracy forward,” Tuck said in an interview. “There is no reason that the queer community cannot be recognized for those accomplishments without individuals in our community perverting their history.”
Meredith Ray, the head of Loudoun4All, noted in an email that Griffiths previously said she wouldn’t vote for any proclamations, but chose to single out the LGTBQ+ proclamation for criticism.
Ray called Griffiths’ decision “malicious” and said her remarks were “ignorant commentary” on the issue.
“Recognition of history is not ‘promotion of a lifestyle.’ LGBTQ+ students, staff, and families exist in Loudoun and deserve the same dignity as everyone else. Griffiths’ attempt to frame recognition as ‘inappropriate content’ is harmful, especially to young people who already face higher rates of bullying and mental health struggles when leaders stigmatize them,” Ray said. “In fact, decades of research show that inclusive education that teaches respect and representation is one of the most effective ways to prevent bullying and improve school climate.”
fleeredstates.blog 
You must be logged in to post a comment.