Congress

Hard-liners balk at GOP’s failure to enshrine anti-transgender laws

Published

4 weeks ago

June 1, 2026

GOP hard-liners who promised voters they’d use their new majority in Washington to enact anti-trans legislation are increasingly frustrated their leaders don’t seem to share the same commitment.

A record number of bills that would roll back access to health care, sports participation and military service for transgender individuals have been introduced over the last year and a half after Republicans spent tens of millions of dollars campaigning on the issue in 2024.

The party has struggled, however, to get more than a handful to President Donald Trump’s desk, and some Republicans worry the weak showing could deflate red state voters come November as the GOP fights to keep control of Congress.

These members are now looking toward legislative packages — like the annual defense policy bill or party-line budget reconciliation bills — as their last chance to codify restrictions on the trans community this year. But leaders are still not making the issues a priority, they say.

“It just amazes me that they aren’t listening on this issue, I really don’t understand that,” Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) said in a recent interview.

Hawley has failed to convince leaders to attach a provision in the current immigration enforcement-focused reconciliation bill that would defund Planned Parenthood, which offers gender-affirming care he called “risky” and “dangerous” for children.

While he successfully zeroed out Medicaid funding for the health care provider in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act — one of the few anti-transgender measures Congress has enacted — that provision will expire in July, upping the pressure to get it reauthorized.

“I’ve absolutely been telling [leaders] I want this in the next bill because taxpayer money shouldn’t be funding transgender treatment for minors,” added Hawley, who is now looking ahead to the potential third reconciliation bill the party could advance later this year.

U.S. medical associations, including the American Academy of Pediatrics, support gender-affirming care for adolescents.

Rep. Nancy Mace (R-S.C.) has introduced a bill that would bar funding from entities that allow individuals to use single-sex restrooms or locker rooms that don’t match their sex assigned at birth. Asked why that measure hasn’t moved through the House, Mace said in an interview, “It’s a great question for the speaker.”

A spokesperson for Speaker Mike Johnson’s office noted that besides last year’s health care funding limitation, measures blocking trans women from joining women’s sports teams at military universities and cutting some diversity, equity and inclusion program initiatives have also successfully been enacted as part of the latest defense authorization bill.

And three GOP bills have passed the House this Congress, including former Republican Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene’s (R-Ga.) bill to establish criminal penalties for performing or providing gender-affirming care to minors.

A person familiar with Senate Majority Leader John Thune’s thinking, granted anonymity to speak candidly, disputed the claim that he doesn’t share the same urgency for anti-trans action as ultraconservatives, pointing to the South Dakota Republican’s moves to bring related GOP measures to the floor and attributing their failure to a lack of bipartisan support necessary to clear 60-vote procedural hurdles.

That roadblock has been the source of growing calls from frustrated conservatives for Thune to push through a Senate rules change to allow more bills to pass by a simple majority — a drastic action he opposes and says he lacks the votes to achieve.

“I’ve called on Thune to nuke the filibuster. It has to be done,” said Rep. Greg Steube (R-Fla.). “There’s no other way conservative legislation like this passes.”

Steube introduced a bill, which passed the House last January, that would prohibit schools receiving federal funding from allowing trans girls to play on female sports teams. Senate Democrats have four times defeated a similar measure introduced by Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.), most recently as an amendment to a stalled partisan elections bill known as the SAVE America Act.

“At some point it does get frustrating that we’re not doing every single thing we can get done,” Rep. Burgess Owens (R-Utah) recently complained. “And until somebody picks this up and says ‘I am going to be a true advocate,’ then we have no way of pushing it any further.”

Owens co-sponsored a measure that passed the House before the recent weeklong recess that would strip federal funds from public schools that alter a student’s name or pronouns in their records without parental permission.

Conservative Republicans started 2025 eager to capitalize on an issue that, in the lead-up to the 2024 election, appeared to galvanize voters. House and Senate Republicans and their affiliated campaign arms unleashed over $110 million in ads on issues such as rejecting gender-affirming care for minors and banning transgender women from participating in women’s and girls’ sports, according to AdImpact data.

Trump, in the closing days of his presidential campaign, spent more on ads criticizing Vice President Kamala Harris for supporting rights for transgender people than on any other subject.

House and Senate Republicans sought to ride the perceived wave of public opinion by introducing record levels of legislation they say are designed to protect the rights of women and girls and shield taxpayers from paying for gender-affirming care they call harmful and exploitative of minors.

Gallup polling before and after the election found that 69 percent of U.S. adults believe that transgender athletes should only be allowed to play on sports teams that match their birth sex. Still, advocates counter that 85 percent of Americans surveyed believe transgender people should have the same rights as everyone else, according to the Human Rights Campaign, the nation’s largest LGBTQ+ rights group.

More than 125 anti-transgender measures were introduced in 2026 alone — up from 109 in 2025 and 88 in 2024, according to counts from Trans Legislation Tracker, a research organization monitoring state and national bills that impact trans and gender-diverse people across the country.

But few of Congress’ legislative efforts have crossed the finish line.

Republicans have been foiled by mobilization from Democrats, who largely argue such restrictions amount to gender discrimination that contributes to serious considerations of suicide among two thirds of transgender youth. Democrats were also able to strip more than 40 “anti-LBGTQ+ riders” from annual government funding bills for the current fiscal year, according to the nearly-200 member Congressional Equality Caucus.

“Every time an anti-LGBTQI+ bill or amendment comes to the floor, members of the Congressional Equality Caucus organize a response and whip as hard as we can against them,” Caucus Chair Mark Takano (D-Calif.) said in a statement.

Meanwhile, despite the GOP’s lack of progress in Congress, White House executive actions and GOP-controlled legislatures have enacted a soaring number of anti-trans policies.

Trump, within the first days of his second administration, signed executive orders to: declare the government would only recognize two sexes, male and female; withhold federal funding for institutions that deliver gender-affirming care to minors; and ban transgender people from the military, among other efforts.

Before Trump started his second term, transgender women had been allowed to compete in women’s categories in the Olympics since 2003 and the NCAA since 2010.

At least 50 anti-trans bills have passed this year alone in red states like Florida, Tennessee, Utah, Kansas and Idaho. And states overall have passed more than 350 anti-trans bills since 2021.

The real-world impact of these efforts has jeopardized the mental and physical wellbeing of transgender individuals, many of whom have also faced violent threats as the issue becomes more deeply politicized, advocates say.

And since most major U.S. medical organizations say gender-affirming care is well-tested, safe and can be medically necessary, many parents of transgender minors have been forced to make a difficult choice: watch their child grapple with what can be extreme distress or move their families to less restrictive states or outside of the U.S to continue care that has been blocked or restricted.

“It would be a mistake to measure the threat to transgender Americans solely by what has or hasn’t passed Congress,” said David Stacy, vice president of government affairs at the Human Rights Campaign.

“The Trump administration has used executive overreach to dismantle hard-won protections, and state legislatures across the country are moving in lockstep.”

Back on Capitol Hill, Republicans insist that codifying some of these policies nationwide is important, while conceding the reality of doing so before November is unlikely.

“Look, it’s absurd that we allow men in women’s sports in our society when I think the vast majority of Americans don’t support it either,” said Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis). “But are we going to get something done this legislative session? Time’s running out, to be honest.”

House Republicans have already packed at least 18 anti-LGBTQ+ policy riders in partisan versions of fiscal 2027 appropriations bills that Democrats are eyeing for removal, according to the Congressional Equality Caucus, and some GOP lawmakers aren’t interested in the risks involved in fighting for the survival of these partisan provisions.

“You could just run out of runway,” Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) said in an interview. “And we’ve got to prioritize. If I’ve got a choice between some of those [trans] issues and getting the NDAA and farm bill out, then I’ve got to favor NDAA and farm bill.”

Congress

Pentagon and elections bills could be combined in bid to unfreeze House floor

Published

28 minutes ago

June 29, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Speaker Mike Johnson said Monday he plans to deploy an unusual procedural maneuver in a bid to unfreeze the House floor this week, seeking to send the annual Pentagon policy bill and the GOP elections bill known as the SAVE America Act to the Senate in a single package.

That is likely a recipe for a continued standoff between the two chambers over the SAVE America Act, which has stalled in the Senate for months due to internal GOP divides. Under Johnson’s plan, the annual defense policy bill, which typically passes every year with large bipartisan majorities, could become a collateral victim of the impasse.

Asked in brief interview if he had talked to Senate Majority Leader John Thune about his plans, Johnson replied, “I have to do my job in the House, and they’ve got to do their job in the Senate, so we’ll see what happens.”

Johnson is seeking to placate House conservative hard-liners, led by Florida Rep. Anna Paulina Luna, who have threatened to oppose the procedural measures that give Republicans control of the floor unless they agree to tougher tactics meant to force the Senate into passing the elections bill.

House GOP leaders discussed the plan to merge the two bills over the weekend as Luna pushed to amend the defense bill directly.

She did not say in an interview Monday whether Johnson’s gambit would suffice: “We want it baked together, not able to be stripped out,” she said.

But the Senate is free to work its own will, and members of that chamber are likely to reject any defense bill that has the partisan elections bill attached. That would set the stage for GOP leaders to strip it out when the House and Senate hash out the differences between their competing Pentagon bills later this year.

Johnson, meanwhile, is pushing a separate plan to pass a slimmed-down version of the SAVE America Act through the party-line budget reconciliation process — an option hard-liners have all but rejected.

“I don’t think that that can be done,” Luna told reporters Monday.

He’s also facing another complication: The version of the SAVE America Act he is proposing to attach to the Pentagon bill doesn’t include the latest demands for the bill from President Donald Trump — including a near-total ban on mail voting that is opposed by many Republicans.

Jennifer Scholtes contributed to this report.

Congress

Top Trump officials face bipartisan questions in first all-member Iran briefings

Published

1 hour ago

June 29, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Lawmakers of both parties questioned Secretary of State Marco Rubio and top Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff Monday in the first broad congressional briefings on President Donald Trump’s Iran deal.

While Democrats asked some of the sharpest questions, participants in an afternoon conference call with House members said, Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) at one point pressed the administration officials on the fate of Iran’s stockpile of near-bomb-grade uranium.

According to two people granted anonymity to disclose the private remarks, Witkoff and Rubio repeated assurances the administration has privately made to select lawmakers in prior briefings — that the goal is to negotiate a final deal that would prohibit Iran from keeping its highly enriched uranium.

The memorandum of understanding Trump signed earlier this month, they said, was meant to launch those negotiations. Witkoff, the people said, added that the technical team involved in that part of the talks was traveling from Switzerland to Qatar, where talks between the U.S. and Iran are set to happen Tuesday.

Democrats, meanwhile, pushed the administration for more details on what financial benefits Iran could reap under the memorandum — including proceeds from previously sanctioned oil sales.

Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.) went back and forth with Rubio and Witkoff over the lifting of the oil sanctions, two other people granted anonymity on the House call said. The officials eventually cut off the conversation and ended the call.

At another point, Rep. Madeleine Dean (D-Pa.) raised concerns about Witkoff’s business interests in the Middle East as he’s negotiating with Iran, prompting a sharp defense from Rubio, those people said.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer asked Rubio and Witkoff about the oil sanctions during a separate all-senators call Monday, saying in a statement afterward that they “confirmed to me that Iran will reap billions in oil revenue while retaining dangerous leverage over the Strait of Hormuz.”

“If this is the administration’s defense behind closed doors, Secretary Rubio should make it under oath, in public, before the Foreign Relations Committee,” Schumer added, calling the briefing “delayed, deficient, and devoid of details.”

An administration official granted anonymity to speak candidly countered on Schumer’s characterization, noting that he had previously gotten a briefing of the deal as part of a group of top leaders engaged on national security matters. Schumer, the official said, had the opportunity to ask multiple follow-up questions on the Senate call.

A separate group of White House officials briefed top congressional leaders and key committee chairs in a classified briefing in the Capitol later Monday.

The administration has faced bipartisan skepticism over multiple provisions of the memorandum of understanding — particularly the lifting of oil sanctions and a $300 billion reconstruction fund that many Senate Republicans fear will help fuel Iran’s military and regional proxies.

Rubio and Witkoff sought to ease concerns about the slow reopening of the Strait of Hormuz — the critical trade route whose closure has sparked higher fuel and fertilizer costs. Both officials said more mine removal is required, and Witkoff indicated that Iran broke the terms of the Trump-signed deal by launching a drone attack on a passing ship over the weekend.

They also sought to assure lawmakers that Iran has received no money under the memorandum — especially not directly from American sources. Administration officials have previously pledged in smaller briefings that the reconstruction fund won’t include U.S. funds.

Sen. Steve Daines (R-Mont.) called the Senate briefing a “productive conversation” but said “much of what I heard today is similar to what I heard last week” during a dinner at Vice President JD Vance’s residence.

Congress

Senate Ethics dismisses allegations against Ruben Gallego

Published

6 hours ago

June 29, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

The Senate Ethics Committee has dismissed allegations of misconduct levied against Sen. Ruben Gallego, who stood accused by Rep. Anna Paulina Luna of “campaign finance violations and inappropriate conduct of a sexual nature.”

The charges came following the resignation of the Arizona Democrat’s longtime friend, Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.), who was forced to step down amid accusations of serious sexual misconduct. Luna, a Florida Republican, sought to implicate Gallego by claiming in an interview on CBS that a woman would come forward about an “incident that occurred between the two of them at the same time and the event was sexual in nature allegedly.”

But in a letter to Gallego sent Monday — which he shared in a public news release — the notoriously inactive Ethics Committee cited Gallego’s “prompt contact with the Committee following media reports of the allegations and appreciated your full cooperation with the Committee throughout the investigation.”

Gallego has maintained he was unaware of the allegations against Swalwell and said in a statement he was a victim of “right-wing conspiracies peddled by far-right activists like Anna Paulina Luna, the White House, and their allies.”

He continued, “I look forward to an apology from Rep. Luna for weaponizing the ethics process while refusing to investigate historic corruption that’s making life harder for families.”

Luna, in a post on X, defended her referral to the Senate Ethics Committee.

“The good news about DC is everyone talks, and eventually the reporters come forward with your texts,” Luna wrote on social media. “Do yourself a favor and keep raising for your legal defense fund. Once a creep always a creep, and you’re gonna need it.”

CORRECTION: An earlier version of this report misstated Rep. Anna Paulina Luna’s state. She represents Florida.