The West African nation of Burkina Faso’s ruling junta unanimously passed a law banning homosexuality yesterday.
“The law provides for a prison sentence of between two and five years as well as fines,” said Justice Minister Edasso Rodrigue Bayala. “If a person is a perpetrator of homosexual or similar practices, all the bizarre behavior, they will go before the judge.”
He said that foreigners will be deported under the law.
Burkina Faso has been under the rule of a military junta since September 2022, when former Interim President Paul-Henri Sandaogo Damiba – who himself came to power in a coup d’état several months earlier – was removed from his office. The civil unrest is a result of the government’s inability to contain an Islamist insurgency.
The Muslim-majority nation had been among the 22 out of 54 African states where same-sex relations were not criminalized. The one-time French colony didn’t inherit anti-homosexuality laws found in many former British colonies.
But the bill to ban homosexuality was supported by 71 unelected members of the transitional parliament yesterday as part of a wider set of family and citizenship law reforms “popularized through an awareness campaign,” officials said. The bill was initially approved by the military government’s leader, Captain Ibrahim Traoré, last year. Traoré has been shifting the country’s focus away from its close relationship with France and toward Russia.
The law goes into effect immediately.
Human rights groups have accused the government of cracking down on human rights with mass arrests and conscripting critics into the military.
In late 2024, neighboring Mali also banned homosexuality. Two other African nations – Ghana and Uganda – increased the punishments for homosexuality in recent years.
Texas House members clashed over a bill that would restrict which restrooms transgender people can use in government buildings and schools, but ultimately approved it late Thursday.
Representatives approved Senate Bill 8 on a 86-45 vote after several hours of tense debate that was at times interrupted by people in the gallery shouting insults at lawmakers who supported the bill. The House gallery, where visitors can watch proceedings, was emptied out by staff and Department of Public Safety officers after the disruptions continued.
SB 8 would restrict bathroom use in government-owned buildings, public schools and universities based of sex assigned at birth and would not allow exceptions for transgender inmates’ housing in prisons and jails. It would also bar those assigned male at birth from accessing women’s domestic violence shelters, unless they are under 17 and the child of a woman also receiving services.
Bathroom bills proposing civil or criminal penalties for entering restrooms not matching biological sex have been proposed in Texas for more than a decade, and 19 other states have successfully passed their own proposals. The Texas House, however, has largely failed to garner traction for bathroom bills after a tense battle over one proposal in 2017. The Texas Senate has passed six different bathroom bills since 2017.
A last-minute amendment from Rep. Steve Toth, R-Conroe, raised the proposed fines to $25,000 against institutions where violations occur, and $125,000 for any subsequent violations. The raised penalties would make SB 8 the most financially punitive bathroom bill in the country. The amendment was adopted without debate.
Supporters of SB 8, which has also been called the “Texas Women’s Privacy Act,” have said the bill is necessary to ensure safety and comfort for women in intimate spaces like changing rooms and bathrooms. The bill’s House sponsor, Rep. Angelia Orr, R-Itasca, said the goal of the bill is to prompt political subdivisions to create their own policies to ensure bathrooms are secure.
“The preference of someone’s sexual appearance does not override the safety and privacy of a biological female,” Orr said.
Orr said the bill does not affect privately owned or funded businesses, and will not create penalties against individuals.
Opponents of the bill have called the restrictions unnecessary, and that the bill would incite harassment against trans people and cisgender people falsely accused of entering the wrong facility. Rep. Jessica Gonzalez, D-Dallas, said she personally had been accused of entering the wrong restroom in the Texas Capitol, which already has a policy similar to SB 8’s proposal.
Questioning from Democrats who opposed the bill attempted to zero in on how the bill would be enforced, as it outlines that agencies will take “every reasonable step” to ensure the policy is followed. Orr said during questioning that it would be up to agencies how to enforce their policy. Previously when the bill was heard in committee, Orr said the policies would be determined based on how someone looked.
“Who do you think is more uncomfortable in the bathroom today? A cis woman, or a trans woman wondering if she’s about to be harassed?” Rep. Erin Zwiener, D-Driftwood, asked.
During testimony in both chambers through the session and on the House floor on Thursday, tensions between lawmakers for and against the bill flared. Several members argued in small groups multiple times and were separated by staffers as debate continued on the floor. At one point, Toth heckled Rep. Rafael Anchia, D-Dallas, for using Bible quotes as he spoke on a failed amendment designed to kill the bill. Toth was warned by a House staffer for the remarks.
Anchia later argued with Rep. Hillary Hickland, R-Belton, away from the floor debate after she chastised his use of the Bible and countered with her own quotes as she expressed support for the bill. Other members cited religion several times after to channel their support and opposition to the bill.
“Everyone is born a child of God, and everyone who is born into this life deserves to be treated that way,” Rep. John Bryant, D-Dallas said. “That is what the Bible says. That is what our hearts tell us. And the only time we act differently is when we get into politics.”
Representatives with family violence shelters expressed concern about the bill’s exclusivity during testimony earlier in the month, and said it could affect not just trans victims of domestic violence, but cisgender women with teenage dependents or adult dependents who are disabled. While four other states have similar sex-based restrictions on shelters, they still allow trans victims to be accepted if they have separate sleeping quarters.
“When you call the hotline, it is often the moment before you believe you will die. I don’t say that with hyperbole,” said Molly Voyles, director of public policy at the Texas Council on Family Violence, during the House State Affairs committee hearing last week when SB 8 was discussed. “Many women fleeing have a son who is 18 still in high school, or a child with a disability over that age for whom they are the primary caretaker. A choice to leave that includes leaving without your child is not a choice at all.”
SB 8 will be sent back to the Senate to approve the changes. Lawmakers have until Sept. 13 to approve any legislation during the second special session.
House Republicans introduced legislation Tuesday to ban transgender girls from participating in girls’ school sports, moving to advance one of the Trump administration’s top priorities.
The measure, titled the Safety and Opportunity for Girls Act, would define “male,” “female” and “sex” by reproductive function in Title IX, the federal civil rights law against sex discrimination in education. Schools receiving federal funds would be barred from allowing transgender students to use restrooms or locker rooms or play on sports teams that match their gender identity, according to the bill, sponsored by Rep. Mary Miller (R-Ill.).
Miller introduced a similar measure to block locker room access for transgender students in March and spearheaded an earlier effort to reverse former President Biden’s expanded nondiscrimination protections for transgender students under the Congressional Review Act last summer.
A news release from Miller’s office says the latest bill, which has 11 Republican co-sponsors, would preserve Title IX’s “original intent” and shield the decades-old law from reinterpretation “by radical leftists or activist judges.”
President Trump’s administration has argued repeatedly that Title IX already prohibits transgender girls from competing on girls’ sports teams or using girls’ bathrooms and changing rooms at school. More than two dozen investigations into states, schools and athletic associations that accommodate transgender students have been opened since Trump’s return to office in January.
School officials in states including California, Maine, Minnesota and Virginia assert their policies are compliant with state and federal law.
A February executive order signed by Trump states that the U.S. opposes “male competitive participation in women’s sports” as a matter of “safety, fairness, dignity, and truth.” Trump warned schools at a signing ceremony that his administration was putting them “on notice.”
“If you let men take over women’s sports teams or invade your locker rooms, you will be investigated for violations of Title IX and risk your federal funding,” he said.
The Supreme Court agreed in July to decide whether states can ban transgender athletes from competing in girls’ and women’s school sports. Since 2020, more than half the nation has adopted laws barring trans students from participating on teams that match their gender identity.
Laws in four states — Arizona, Idaho, Utah and West Virginia — are blocked by court orders, and New Hampshire’s ban on trans athletes is partially blocked. In February, the two New Hampshire high schoolers suing the state expanded their challenge to include the Trump administration.
House Republicans, joined by two Democrats, passed legislation in January to ban transgender student-athletes from girls’ sports teams — an effort ultimately thwarted by Senate Democrats.
Senate Bill 8, an anti-trans “bathroom bill,” would require government buildings —including public universities — to designate restrooms, locker rooms, and other facilities strictly by “biological sex,” instead of gender identity. SB 8 penalizes institutions, not individuals: a first violation carries a $5,000 fine, with repeat violations rising to $25,000 each. It also empowers the state attorney general to investigate complaints.
“I will say it again: SB 8 does NOT protect women. It is an unconstitutional and a direct attack on the rights of the Trans community,” state Rep. Jessica González (D), who represents District 104 and chairs the Texas House LGBTQ Caucus, wrote on X. “This bill is nothing less than discriminatory and harmful, and it has no place in Texas.”
The state Senate approved SB 8 earlier this month, and it was subsequently greenlighted by the House State Affairs Committee on August 22, despite about 100 activists gathering at the Texas Capitol to protest it, with nearly half of the protesters participating in a sit-in.
Cameron Samuels, an incoming student at the Lyndon B. Johnson School of Public Affairs, told The Daily Texan that bills like SB 8 are designed to erase trans lives. “We are the experts of our lived experiences and this hate and bigotry relies on our inability to tell our stories,” Samuels said.
“They are seeking to silence and erase our narratives. But when we are telling our stories and demonstrating a more accurate reflection of what it means to be a transgender Texan, then we bust those myths and we challenge those narratives.”
According to Equality Texas, testimony on the bill was halted after just two hours, leaving nearly 100 people who had signed up to speak without the chance to testify. After Republicans ended the testimony early, Democratic Representatives Jessica González and Donna Howard held a “people’s hearing” in the Texas Capitol auditorium. SB 8 is now awaiting a final vote and debate on the House floor.
Protesters also rallied against House Bill 7, a sweeping measure that seeks to sharply restrict access to abortion medication. HB 7 would allow private citizens to sue anyone who manufactures, mails, prescribes, or provides abortion pills in Texas, with damages starting at $100,000 per violation.
The measure mirrors earlier “bounty” laws but expands them by targeting the most common method of abortion in the United States. On August 25, the House State Affairs Committee passed a revised version of the bill.
“Despite already having a total abortion ban on the books—one that is wreaking havoc on the state’s health care infrastructure and tragically taking the lives of pregnant people—the Texas legislature is voting on SB 7, another horrifying bounty hunter bill,” the Center for Reproductive Rights said on X. “If enacted, one of the very last avenues for Texans to access critical reproductive care will be closed off.”
Lawmakers have until September 13 to pass the bills during the special session. If approved, SB 8 and HB 7 would add to Texas’s growing slate of anti-trans and anti-abortion laws.
Referral claims for refugee protection in Canada from people in the U.S. have already surpassed last year’s total, based on data from Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada (IRB). These referrals also spiked the last time President Donald Trump was in office.
While there were 204 U.S. claim referrals to the board’s Refugee Protection Division total last year, 245 claims were referred to the RPD from January through June of this year. Trump was inaugurated in January.
For some perspective, there were 216 referrals listed from Afghanistan during that same time period this year, 62 listed from El Salvador, 2,784 listed from Mexico, 265 listed from Palestine, 260 listed from Syria, 403 listed from Venezuela and 131 listed from Yemen.
At the start of former President Joe Biden’s term in 2021, there were 118 claim referrals from the U.S., with the same number the following year – both a drop from 154 in 2020. In 2023, the number of referrals increased to 157.
However, back in 2013 – the first year that the IRB has data for – there were just 69 referrals. That was during the second term of former President Barack Obama, and while he was in office during 2014 and 2015 referrals were at 88 and 69 respectively. They increased to 129 in 2016, when Trump was campaigning against Democratic candidate and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.
During Trump’s first year in office in 2017, the referrals skyrocketed to 869. In 2018, they were still higher at 642, followed by 423 in 2019.
When asked by Newsweek about the referral increase this year, White House Deputy Press Secretary Anna Kelly said: “Why does Newsweek care about this .00007 percent of the population who want higher taxes, worse health care, and anti-American trade policies?”
Bloomberg reported this week that officials from the U.S. and Canada are expected to discuss tariffs soon. That outlet has also reported on an influx of people from the U.S. attempting to cross the border into Canada. It said that “during the first six days of July, Canadian officials at the Saint-Bernard-de-Lacolle border crossing – the busiest land port between New York and Quebec – received 761 asylum claims, a more than 400% increase from the same period a year ago.”
In Canada, refugee advocates, federal government departments and immigration lawyers were already bracing for asylum claimants from the U.S. in January, according to the CBC.
“With Trump, crystal balls are hard to keep clear,” said Gabriela Ramo, past chair of the Canadian Bar Association’s immigration section, per the outlet.
In addition to the crackdown on illegal immigration, reasons why people might be seeking to leave the U.S. cited by Newsweek include U.S. policy shifts and court rulings have restricted access to gender-affirming care, limited who can serve in the military, and imposed rules on participation in sports and the use of certain facilities. This month, Audacy reported that the president’s approval rating even among his own party was slipping. This Tuesday, Gallup reported that Trump’s polling was “tepid” this month at 40%. Economist approval tracking updated Tuesday showed that his rating was up slightly compared to the previous week at 41%.
A trans woman’s court victory in Kenya could have wide-ranging implications for trans rights in the East African nation, after a judge agreed she suffered inhuman and degrading treatment at the hands of government authorities and directed Parliament to enact protections and recognition in law for trans Kenyans.
The plaintiff, Shieys Chepkosgei, was detained in 2019 and charged with “impersonation,” despite the fact that she had held official documents, including a birth certificate and passport with female sex markers, while living in another country where she had also competed in women’s athletics.
Chepkosgei was arrested by Kenyan police while visiting a teaching hospital, Q Newsreports.
She was remanded to a women’s facility, strip-searched, and ordered by a court to undergo “gender determination,” which included a genital examination, hormone testing, blood sampling, and radiological testing.
Chepkosgei challenged her detention and the nonconsensual medical examinations in court, arguing they were unconstitutional, violated her inherent dignity, and highlighted a legislative gap in the treatment of transgender persons in custody in Kenya.
Justice R. Nyakundi of the Eldoret High Court agreed that Chepkosgei’s rights to dignity, privacy, and freedom from inhuman and degrading treatment had been violated, according to Jinsiangu, a Kenyan intersex, transgender, and gender non-conforming rights group. She was awarded the equivalent of about $8000.
But the judge went a step further, directing the Kenyan government to initiate legislation in Parliament addressing the rights of transgender Kenyans, either with new protections or by amending current legislation on the rights of intersex people currently moving through Parliament.
“This is the first time a Kenyan court has explicitly ordered the State to create legislation on transgender rights, and a first on the African continent,” Jinsiangu’s Lolyne Ongeri told Mamba Online.
“If implemented, it could address decades of legal invisibility and discrimination faced by transgender persons by establishing clear legal recognition of gender identity, protections against discrimination in employment, housing, healthcare, and education, and access to public services without bias or harassment.”
Kenya has a fraught history with LGBTQ+ rights, with colonial-era penalties for same-sex behavior still in effect, and discriminatory legislation modeled on Uganda’s notorious Anti-Homosexuality Act – which allows for the death penalty for homosexuality – introduced in Parliament.
Same-sex relations remain criminalized, with “carnal knowledge against the order of nature” and “gross indecency” punishable by up to 14 years in prison.
Transgender people in Kenya face widespread stigma, discrimination, and violence. Current law bars trans Kenyans from legally changing their gender identity from the one assigned at birth.
While LGBTQ+ people have found relief in the courts, homophobia pervades Kenyan society and the legislature.
In 2023, Kenya’s Supreme Court affirmed a decision granting an LGBTQ+ rights group official status and legal recognition as a non-governmental organization (NGO). The decision ignited protests in the country’s second-largest city, led by clerics and homophobic politicians.
At least 21 hospitals and health systems have suspended or reduced health services for transgender minors and young adults in 2025, according to an NBC News analysis. Many providers cited fears of federal investigations and the potential loss of government funding.
This rollback comes against a backdrop of escalating legal attacks on transgender health care. In recent years, 26 states have passed bans restricting gender-affirming care for minors, with six making it a felony to provide certain treatments. Roughly 40% of trans youth ages 13 to 17 now live in states where access to care is restricted, according to KFF. In June, the Supreme Court upheld Tennessee’s gender-affirming care ban, effectively green-lighting similar laws nationwide.
At the federal level, restricting access to transition-related care has become a main policy objective of the administration. In January, the president signed an executive order directing federal agencies to cut off funding for gender-affirming care for minors and instructing the Department of Justice (DOJ) to investigate and criminalize providers and health centers that offer such care. In April, Attorney General Pam Bondi ordered the DOJ to investigate providers, hospitals, and clinics that provide gender-affirming care to trans youth.
The crackdown escalated earlier this summer when federal prosecutors issued subpoenas to more than 20 hospitals and clinics. In August, sixteen states and the District of Columbia filed suit in an attempt to block the administration’s investigations. However, several providers that received subpoenas chose to suspend offering gender-affirming care instead of waiting for the outcome of the lawsuit.
The chilling effect has extended even into Democratic-led “sanctuary” states, where lawmakers have promised protections for transgender people. While attorneys general in those states initially reminded hospitals that scaling back gender-affirming care could violate state anti-discrimination laws, none have pursued enforcement actions. In practice, this has allowed hospitals to quietly eliminate or reduce programs without consequence.
The Trump administration directed 40 states, five territories and Washington, D.C., to remove references to transgender people from their sex education programs or risk losing federal funding.
The Administration for Children and Families (ACF), a division of the Department of Health and Human Services, sent letters Tuesday demanding that the health departments in these states and territories remove “all references to gender ideology” from their Personal Responsibility Education Program, or PREP. The program is a federally funded initiative created in 2010 to help prevent teen pregnancy and sexually transmitted infections.
“Accountability is coming,” acting Assistant Secretary Andrew Gradison said in a statement. “Federal funds will not be used to poison the minds of the next generation or advance dangerous ideological agendas. The Trump Administration will ensure that PREP reflects the intent of Congress, not the priorities of the left.”
The 40 states that received letters are: Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Georgia, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, Vermont, Washington, West Virginia, Wisconsin and Wyoming. The five U.S. territories are: Guam, Northern Mariana Islands, Palau, Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands.
Links to all 46 letters were included in the administration’s press statement. The ACF’s four-page letter to New York, for example, includes a bulleted list of course content that was flagged during a “medical accuracy review” earlier this year and “must be removed from New York’s PREP curricula and program materials.”
The content flagged for removal includes definitions of gender identity and gender expression and directives that program facilitators allow students to share their pronouns and “demonstrate acceptance and respect for all participants, regardless of personal characteristics, including race, cultural background, religion, social class, sexual orientation or gender identity,” according to the letter.
If New York’s health department declines to comply, it could lose more than $6 million in federal funds, according to data provided by ACF. The other states and territories stand to lose $300,000 to $4.6 million each.
The letters come just days after the ACF terminated $12 million of California’s remaining PREP funding after the state’s health department declined to remove references to trans people from the curriculum, arguing that the references had already been approved by the agency, the materials were medically accurate and relevant to the statute, and ACF does not have the authority to take such an enforcement action, according to ACF’s termination letter to the state.
California’s health department has 30 days to appeal.A spokesperson for the department said in a statement that the state maintains its position that its PREP curriculum “is medically accurate, comprehensive, and age-appropriate.”
“CA PREP sexual health education curriculum promotes healthy relationships and reduces the rates of sexually transmitted infections (STIs) and unintended pregnancy, as well as leads to delayed sexual activity in youth — all outcomes that lead to a healthier state,” the spokesperson said.
In an emailed statement, Elana Ross, a spokesperson for California Gov. Gavin Newsom, said, “If it’s a day ending in y, President Trump is attacking kids’ safety, health, and access to education as part of his culture war.”
The action from ACF is part of the Trump administration’s ongoing effort to prohibit federal recognition of trans people and penalize the use of federal funds for any program that includes or mentions them.
Federal officials have also removed mentions of trans or intersex people from agency websites, including from the website for the Stonewall National Monument commemorating the site of the 1969 Stonewall uprising in New York, which is widely considered a turning point in the modern gay rights movement.
After a transgender immigrant woman was detained following a traffic stop by Romulus police, local advocacy groups are speaking out, highlighting challenges LGBTQ immigrants face while in federal custody.
In June, Alexa, a transgender woman living in Ypsilanti, Michigan, was pulled over by a Romulus police officer for allegedly speeding. Instead of being given a ticket, officials contacted border patrol, who then took the Honduran native into federal custody.
CBS News Detroit contacted Alexa’s attorneys and is waiting to hear back. Both the ACLU of Michigan and local advocacy group Affirmations LGBTQ+ Community Center, which are in support of Alexa, said they have been in contact with her attorneys.
Alexa’s attorney told Detroit Free Press that her client reported alleged abuse while in federal custody, including being unable to shower and communicate with her attorneys.
While not directly involved in Alexa’s representation, Jay Kaplan, staff attorney with the ACLU of Michigan’s LGBT Project, collaborated with several local groups to support her.
“There are unique circumstances involving members of the transgender and non-binary immigrant community,” said Kaplan. “If they’re going to be sent to a detention center, that these centers should be taking into consideration their gender identity and their gender expression as it relates to safety,” said Kaplan.
Soon after Alexa’s arrest, the Affirmations LGBTQ+ Community Center was asked to write letters of support for her case. Justin Bettcher, senior manager of Community Engagement, says while the Ferndale, Michigan, center was limited in what it could offer, they would do anything to help.
“When you look at anything statistically, whether that be suicide rates, arrest rates, things like that, when you add that intersecting LGBTQ+ identity to that, those numbers go up exponentially,” Bettcher said. “It was a really quick turnaround as well. It was, I think, a day and a half, and it was one of those things where I knew immediately, I wanted to do it.”
“Even if it was a one-page letter to an immigration judge, I wanted to do something.”
We reached out to U.S. Customs and Border Protection for comment, and a spokesperson said:
“Romulus police contacted U.S. Border Patrol requesting assistance with identifying one subject they had in custody at the Romulus Police Station. [Alexa] stated they were a citizen of Honduras and stated they did not possess any documents allowing them to stay, live, reside, work, or remain in the United States legally. USBP placed them under arrest and transported them to the Gibraltar Border Patrol Station for identity verification and verification of the documents they had in their possession. The claims they did not shower or have any communication are blatantly false. Detainees are provided showers, soap, and a clean towel for those approaching 72 hours in detention. They showered on June 9 and June 12. Additionally, agents granted them telephone access per policy. Both of these are outlined in CBP’s National Standards on Transport, Escort, Detention, and Search.”
CBS News Detroit contacted Immigration and Customs Enforcement for comment about the alleged abuse and is waiting to hear back.
Moving to a new country is a big decision, and for LGBTQ Americans, finding a place that is not only welcoming but also legally protective is a top priority. While many European nations have made significant strides in LGBTQ+ rights, one country consistently stands out for its progressive laws and accepting culture: Malta. This tiny island nation in the heart of the Mediterranean has become a beacon of hope, earning a reputation as one of the most LGBTQ-friendly countries in the world.
Malta’s journey to becoming an LGBTQ+ rights leader is a remarkable story of rapid progress. For several years, it has topped the ILGA-Europe’s Rainbow Map, a ranking of 49 European countries based on their legal and policy practices for LGBTQ+ people. This isn’t a fluke; it’s the result of a concerted effort to enshrine equality into law. Same-sex sexual activity was decriminalized in 1973, but the most significant changes have happened in the last decade.
In 2014, Malta legalized civil unions, giving same-sex couples the same rights and responsibilities as married couples, including the right to adopt children. Just three years later, in 2017, the country took the monumental step of legalizing same-sex marriage, a move that replaced the traditional “husband and wife” with the gender-neutral term “spouses”. This wasn’t just a legal formality; it was a powerful statement of inclusion.
Beyond relationship recognition, Malta has also been a trailblazer in other areas. In 2016, it became the first country in the European Union to ban conversion therapy, a harmful and discredited practice [4]. The Gender Identity, Gender Expression and Sex Characteristics Act of 2015 allows transgender people to change their legal gender without the need for surgery or a medical diagnosis, a process based on self-determination [5]. The country also provides gender-affirming care and has banned intersex infant surgeries without medical necessity. These protections extend to employment, housing, and healthcare, ensuring that LGBTQ+ individuals are shielded from discrimination in their daily lives.
While a country’s legal framework is crucial, the lived experience is just as important. Malta’s culture, while traditionally Catholic, has shown a remarkable shift toward acceptance. Public displays of affection are generally well-received, and the LGBTQ+ community is active and visible. Valletta, the capital, and nearby Sliema are known for their vibrant scenes, with dedicated gay bars, clubs, and events, including a lively Pride celebration in September. Rabat has also been mentioned.
So How Do I Get There?
As with any country friendly to immigration, you have options. You can try out living there first simply by applying for a Digital Nomad visa, and become a full time paid blogger. There are other programs to establish residence, which include investing locally. You can buy or rent property as well.
For LGBTQ Americans considering a move abroad, Malta offers a compelling combination of legal protections, a high degree of social acceptance, and a beautiful, sunny, and historic location. The country’s commitment to equality is not just a passing trend; it’s a foundational principle that makes it an ideal place to call home.
fleeredstates.blog 
You must be logged in to post a comment.