‘An Embrace of Anti-Intellectualism’: Public School Bans on Nonfiction Books Doubled as Trump Returned to Power

One expert warned that removing works on activism and social movements erodes the ability of marginalized communities “to take action amid rising authoritarian tactics by our government and attacks on free speech.”



Children lie on a rug in a classroom, reading a book.
(Photo by FatCamera/Getty Images)

Jessica Corbett
May 07, 2026
COMMON DREAMS

As President Donald Trump returned to the White House in the middle of the 2024-25 academic year and swiftly pursued increasingly authoritarian policies, there was “an embrace of anti-intellectualism” within the book-banning movement targeting US public schools and classrooms.

That embrace is detailed in “Facts & Fiction: Stories Stripped Away By Book Bans,” an annual report released Thursday by PEN America, a nonprofit that promotes the protection of free expression through the advancement of human rights and literature.

Report on State of US Libraries Exposes Trump Attacks and Record-Breaking Book Ban Efforts

The group found that from July 2024 to last June, 3,743 unique titles were removed from school libraries and classrooms nationwide—and 1,102 of them were “educational or informational books for young people—textbooks or reference texts on a wide range of subjects, history books, biographies, and autobiographies.”

Although the majority of banned titles were still fiction, such as Fahrenheit 451 by Ray Bradbury and The Hunger Games by Suzanne Collins, the share of “fiction titles dropped from 85% to 69% of all banned titles, while nonfiction rose from 14% to a startling 29% of all banned titles,” according to the analysis.

“This marked impact on books anchored in scientific and historic facts, real events, and real people represents something new and distinctive about the trajectory of book bans in public schools,” the report states. “As nonfiction titles are not always the targets of efforts to remove books, that books on ancient Egypt, the digestive system, and self-help for teens, to name a few examples, are impacted by censorship signals an alarming spread of book bans that ignore the educational value of texts and books.”

Targeted “nonfiction titles are wide-ranging,” the report notes, “from memoirs such as Night by Elie Wiesel to biographies such as RuPaul by Maria Isabel Sánchez Vegara, alongside historical and educational or informational books such as Aztec, Inca & Maya by Elizabeth Baquedano and Challenges for LGBTQ Teens by Martha Lundin.”

Flagging this “embrace of anti-intellectualism” in a statement about the new report, Kasey Meehan, director of PEN America’s Freedom to Read program, said that “it is another example of how censorship sweeps broadly, leading to removals of all kinds of books, in its efforts to sow fear and distrust in our public education system.”

Like the previous academic year, “realistic/contemporary and dystopia/sci-fi/fantasy remain the dominant genres banned,” the publication highlights. “But of note, educational/informational titles grew from 5% of all titles in 2023-24 to 13% of total titles banned in 2024-25, or nearly 500 unique titles.”

Among the nonfiction titles banned, “52% contained themes of activism and social movements, the most commonly banned topic within nonfiction titles,” the report says. “Whether #WomensMarch: Insisting on Equality by Rebecca Felix or IntersectionAllies: We Make Room for All by Chelsea Johnson, LaToya Council, and Carolyn Choi, and illustrated by Ashley Seil Smith, this literature is crucial in the education of young people. These books can encourage readers to challenge the status quo and resist injustice.”

Freedom to Read program assistant and report co-author Yuliana Tamayo Latorre said that removing books on these topics “silences the voices of marginalized communities and erode[s] their ability to take action amid rising authoritarian tactics by our government and attacks on free speech.”

The most common theme across all banned books was nonsexual violence. This was a theme in 57% of the targeted titles, and they addressed topics including “war, gun violence, natural disasters, domestic violence, human trafficking, slavery and genocide, physical fighting, and more.”

Other key themes included death and grief (48%), empowerment and self-esteem (39%), LGBTQ+ topics and metaphors (36%), consensual sexual experiences (34%), mental health disorders (29%), verbal or emotional abuse (28%), and substance use and/or abuse (27%).

There was an increase in banned titles with themes of empowerment and self-esteem, up from 31% in 2023-24.

“Fictional titles with themes of empowerment include Flor Fights Back: A Stonewall Riots Survival Story by Joy Michael Ellison and illustrated by Francesca Ficorilli, and The Moon Within by Aida Salazar,” the report says. “To remove these books from classroom and library shelves means revoking access to books that students may rely on for personal and emotional development.”

There is an entire section of the report about “erasing people” that examines trends in the identities of characters in banned books. Of all the targeted titles, 44% featured people of color, 39% had LGBTQ+ characters, 19% included transgender or genderqueer individuals, and 10% involved those who are neurodivergent or disabled.

Trump and other leading Republicans have embraced and advanced campaigns against diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI). PEN America acknowledged that such efforts “have contributed to restrictions and removals on books with people of color and mirror efforts to suppress curriculum on Indigenous history, Black history, Asian American and Pacific Islander stories, and Latine and Hispanic contributions.”

Another section of the report addresses a major “discrepancy between the titles impacted by book bans and the justifications made to ban books. Book banners have long cited ‘pornography’ and ‘sexually explicit’ material in literature to justify book challenges. Claims that these books contain ‘explicit’ or ‘obscene’ content grossly misrepresent the materials.”

That section points out that 19% of last year’s banned titles contained sexual violence—and “according to RAINN, 1 in 9 girls and 1 in 20 boys under 18 experience sexual abuse or assault. With so many of these titles banned since 2021, it is possible that some young people who have experienced sexual violence no longer have access to books that could help them.”

“Books containing experiences of sexual violence include The Nickel Boys by Colson Whitehead, winner of the 2020 Pulitzer Prize for Fiction, set in a 1960s Southern juvenile reform school, and Laurie Halse Anderson’s memoir Shout, a call to action for sexual abuse and trauma survivors in the wake of the #MeToo movement,” according to PEN America.

The group’s report came just a few weeks after a similar annual publication from the American Library Association, which details challenges to at least 4,235 unique titles in 2025, resulting in bans on at least 5,668 books and restrictions on another 920 works.

“In 2025, book bans were not sparked by concerned parents, and they were not the result of local grassroots efforts,” noted Sarah Lamdan, executive director of the association’s Office for Intellectual Freedom. “They were part of a well-funded, politically driven campaign to suppress the stories and lived experiences of LGBTQIA+ and BIPOC individuals and communities.”

For Decades, Trans People Have Helped Lead the Fight Against Sexual Violence

Today, trans and gender-nonconforming survivors continue a legacy of resistance that goes back longer than we may know.

By Gabriel Arkles ,

 Truthout

April 29, 2026

People attend the Trans Day of Visibility Rally hosted by the Christopher Street Project on the National Mall in Washington, D.C., on March 31, 2025.Bryan Dozier / Middle East Images / AFP via Getty Images

Support justice-driven, accurate and transparent news — make a quick donation to Truthout today!

Over the past year, we have seen the Trump administration repeatedly use the specter of sexual violence to scapegoat immigrants and trans people — specifically women and transfeminine people. Both historically and currently, these groups are disproportionately likely to face sexual violence, but in the right-wing narrative, they have been reframed as its perpetrators. While breathtaking in its hypocritical victim-blaming, this story is actually an old one: Powerful men excuse or deny their own acts of sexual violence while demonizing marginalized communities as the “real” threat to justify their repression.

But for as long as that story has unfolded, people have resisted. Every April is Sexual Assault Awareness Month, a time to recommit to supporting survivors and preventing sexual assault. This year, I want to focus on some of those stories of resistance. For decades, trans people, queens, butches, and other gender-nonconforming people in the U.S. have resisted sexual violence in countless ways — whether through seeking policy change, opening their homes to other survivors, telling their stories, escaping attackers, confronting harassment, or organizing others to support survivors. What follows are just a few examples.


Frances Thompson’s 1866 Testimony

Frances Thompson, a Black disabled woman, was one of the many Black people attacked by white people during the Memphis Massacre of 1866. In the aftermath, she testified before Congress about her experience of being raped. Her testimony was part of an effort to pass the Reconstruction Amendments, and she won. Partly because of her testimony, Congress passed the 14th Amendment, guaranteeing equal protection under the law to all people.

The promise of that amendment has yet to be realized. It did not even protect Thompson in her lifetime: Years after her testimony, authorities arrested and stripped her — another sexual assault at the hands of white men. Thompson was fined and jailed after these authorities learned that she was a transgender woman, and the white press speculated that, as a trans woman, she must have lied about getting attacked. She continued to speak out, telling a reporter about mistreatment from the chief of police — allegations the reporter declined to put in print. But Thompson’s legacy lives on, and still today, Black people, trans people, women, and disabled people targeted by the government use the 14th amendment as a legal tool to demand equal treatment.

Related Story

Trans People Behind Bars Share How They Are Navigating the Dangers of Visibility
The vitriol of Trump’s anti-trans attacks has stoked anti-trans violence by prison staff and other incarcerated people. By Gabriel Arkles , Truthout/TheAppeal March 31, 2026


Ralph Kerwineo’s 1914 Article

Ralph Kerwineo, a multiracial clerk in Milwaukee, catapulted into the public spotlight when his first wife, Mamie White, went to the police to report that he was assigned female at birth. She did so after he had left her and married a younger woman, Dorothy Klenowski. When put on trial, Kerwineo managed to convince the judge that he lived and dressed as a man solely for economic and safety reasons, not for any “immoral” purpose. Kerwineo used the media spotlight to condemn male violence toward women, writing about the prevalence of sexual harassment particularly in the workplace. He explained, “Don’t misunderstand me; there are good men in the world, just as there are good women, but living, both as a man and a woman, I have found that most men do not consider sexual sins of any great consequences. Two-thirds of the physicians I met made a nurse’s virtue the price of influence in getting her steady work.” Klenowski shared the same message, telling a reporter that she “had to leave place after place of employment because of the overtures to me by either the proprietors or others in authority.”


Don Solovich’s 1923 Report

Don Solovich, a Serbian-speaking immigrant, performer, server, and butler, refused to be silent when they encountered violence. One day in 1923, Solovich met a man named Macon Irby on the street in California. Irby commented on Solovich’s visible femininity, and Solovich explained they were a female impersonator. The two decided to get a hotel room together. Irby tried to initiate sex, but Solovich said no, after which Irby beat and robbed them. Solovich went to the police, and Irby was charged with robbery. Irby’s defense was that it was Solovich who tried to initiate sex, which outraged Irby so much that he beat Solovich. Irby denied taking their money and, in explaining why he beat them, imitated the feminine way Solovich walked for the jury. The first jury could not reach a verdict, so Irby was tried again, and Solovich would have had to testify again. That jury convicted, but the conviction was then overturned on appeal — the prosecutor had elicited testimony implying that Irby had sex with men, which the appellate court ruled was irrelevant to the issue of robbery. Years later, Solovich was killed, and their killer offered a similar defense for his violence in court.


Mabel Hampton’s Escapes, Around 1910, 1921

Mabel Hampton, a Black stud, dancer, singer, and domestic worker, encountered sexual assault numerous times in her life — and she found ways to get away. Her uncle tried to rape her when she was just 8 years old. She screamed and kicked, and soon after, she ran away, using money she earned dancing for change on the street to leave town. When she was a teenager, strangers assaulted her, and she managed to dash onto a subway car to escape when they tried to move her, narrowly dodging a thrown knife. This time she told her friends, who drew their own knives and looked for her attackers. Hampton supported civil rights and lesbian movements over the course of decades, and she co-founded the Lesbian Herstory Archives in 1974.


Rev. Dr. Pauli Murray’s 1940 Letters

Pauli Murray, the Black transmasculine lawyer, writer, professor, reverend, and saint, is probably best known for their brilliant legal strategies opposing race and sex discrimination. But before they became a lawyer, they had their own encounters with the legal system. In 1940, when Murray was traveling with their girlfriend Adelene “Mac” McBean through Virginia, they were both arrested for objecting to the racist treatment they received on a segregated bus. After white officers jailed them, some of the men in an adjacent cell started verbally harassing Murray and Mac. These men also used an angled mirror under the cell door to look at them, depriving them of any privacy. In response, Murray applied principles of nonviolent struggle and wrote a letter to the men, explaining how they had come to be arrested and stressing how unjust racial segregation was. The harassment stopped. Four men pushed apology notes back to them. The women Murray and Mac were confined with also became less hostile. As Murray wrote in one of their memoirs, “eventually we were all agreeing on the need for solidarity in the struggle for racial emancipation.”


Stormé DeLarverie’s 1969 Bail Money

Stormé DeLarverie, a disabled Black performer, survived plenty of violence in her life. While sometimes called a butch lesbian, male impersonator, drag king, trans man, gender-bender, or nonbinary person, she refused labels and expressed no preference on the gendered language people use. Deeply committed to protecting her community from street-based harassment and other violence, she not only worked as a bouncer at a lesbian bar, she also regularly patrolled the streets in her off hours to see if anyone could use her help. That’s what DeLarverie was doing at Stonewall in 1969 — just seeing if anyone needed anything. When a cop called her a slur and punched her in the eye, though, she spun around and knocked him out with one punch. Then she went home to tend her eye and get money so she could bail out anyone who needed it. She was often armed and never shied away from confronting someone harassing LGBTQ+ people, all of whom she considered her babies. Later in her life, she told an interviewer: “I’m a human being that survived. I’ve helped other people survive.”


Sylvia Rivera’s 1973 Speech

Sylvia Rivera, a Puerto Rican street queen, revolutionary, and another Stonewall veteran, supported her community’s safety through many means, including direct action and mutual aid. Rivera’s 1973 speech — now famous thanks to Tourmaline’s archival work — is a powerful example of how she called on others to show up for gay people beaten and raped in jail. “I’ve been trying to get up here all day for your gay brothers and your gay sisters in jail that write me every motherfucking week and ask for your help, and you all don’t do a goddamn thing for them. Have you ever been beaten up and raped in jail?” she asked the crowd. “They’ve been beaten up and raped after they’ve had to spend much of their money in jail to get their self home and to try to get their sex changes.… I have been to jail. I have been raped, and beaten.”

Rivera took the audience to task for failing their siblings, but she didn’t stop there. She called on them to come to the headquarters of the organization she co-founded — Street Transvestite Action Revolutionaries (STAR) — to learn more. Among other things, the STAR Manifesto demanded “the right to self-determination over the use of our bodies” and “the immediate end of all police harassment.”


Dee Deirdre Farmer’s 1989 Lawsuit

Before Dee Deirdre Farmer brought her case to the Supreme Court and won, prison officials had nearly complete impunity when it came to allowing sexual violence in prisons. Farmer nonetheless pursued a case in 1989 demanding accountability after officials ignored the risk she faced as a young trans woman in a federal penitentiary for adult men, leading to her rape. She brought her case without a lawyer through the lower courts and all the way up to the Supreme Court, finally getting representation from the ACLU once she had convinced the Supreme Court to hear her case. Against the odds, she won, with the Supreme Court unanimously ruling in 1994 that violent assault was not “part of the penalty” for breaking the law. Her case has since been cited tens of thousands of times. In the decades since, Farmer has continued to advocate for trans, LGBTQ+, HIV-positive, and disabled people in prison, assisting over a thousand incarcerated people with their own cases.


Lorena Borjas’s Cart and Folding Bed, 1980s to 2020

Lorena Borjas, an immigrant from Mexico and survivor of trafficking, police violence, and domestic violence, helped countless other trans Latina New Yorkers survive pandemics, poverty, and violence. She worked relentlessly, usually without pay, to protect her community. She filled her cart with condoms and food and brought it to trans sex workers on the streets in Queens. Borjas welcomed trans people who didn’t have a safe place to stay into her own home, where she had a folding bed for them to sleep on. She connected trafficking survivors with immigration lawyers. She raised money to post bail. For countless survivors, she offered advice, connection, support, and love.


Juan Evans’s 2014 March

Juan Evans, a formerly incarcerated trans man and organizer with Racial Justice Action Center and Solutions Not Punishment Collaborative (SnapCo) in Atlanta, spent his life fighting for prison abolition and the freedom, health, and safety of trans sex workers and Black women, among others. In 2014, he was pulled over, and the police officer, surprised by his ID and gender presentation, demanded to know about his genitals. The officer arrested Evans for being trans, repeatedly threatening him with the assault of a strip search to inspect his genitals and calling him a “thing” and an “it.” His wife, his lawyer, and his boss came to the station and got him out. Afterward, Evans led a march and rally to demand change and spoke to the press. He received an official apology from the mayor and worked with others at SnapCo to push for better policies and training for police. Through SnapCo, he also used somatic healing to address the trauma of the experience, and continued organizing to close jails.


Alyssa Rodriguez’s 2022 Settlement

Alyssa Rodriguez, a Puerto Rican trans New Yorker, was criminalized and incarcerated several times, and advocated for herself and other LGBTQ+ people in carceral systems. She was confined in juvenile detention as a teen, where she was denied hormone treatment, forced to wear boys’ clothes and underwear, and punished for her femininity. She started legal action in 2006 that ultimately led to important changes in how transfeminine, gender-nonconforming, and LGBTQ+ young people were treated in juvenile detention in New York State. Years later, Rodriguez brought a lawsuit against the New York City Department of Correction when officials’ actions led to her rape on Rikers Island. While she passed away in 2020 before her lawsuit concluded, her estate settled the case for $1.4 million.

Fighting sexual assault has been a key part of many liberation movements, including movements for trans and queer liberation. Today, trans and gender-nonconforming survivors continue a legacy of resistance that goes back longer than we know. Trans and gender-nonconforming people — in the midst of the unrelenting and seemingly ever-escalating attacks on our communities — continue to organize to provide shelter, support each other, find safer havens, share our stories, defend ourselves, mobilize to protect rights, and demand accountability.


This article is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0), and you are free to share and republish under the terms of the license.

Gabriel Arkles
Gabriel Arkles is an attorney and writer based in Brooklyn, New York. His work has also appeared in publications such as NBC News, CBS, the Advocate, Scholar and Feminist Online, NYU Law Review, Northeastern Law Journal, Southwestern Law Review, and Signs. He writes in his individual capacity, and his views do not necessarily reflect those of his employer.

Consumers Looking to Avoid Trump Have One Fewer Option in REI

REI’s leadership has endorsed leaders who gutted public lands, greenwashed their use of AI, deployed a union-busting law firm, and rigged their governance structure to shut out different perspectives.


REI’s flagship New York store stands in Lower Manhattan on January 25, 2022 in New York City.
(Photo by Spencer Platt/Getty Images)

Jules Geritz
Apr 26, 2026

Common Dreams

In the Trump 2.0 era, many Americans have begun to engage in a new “conscious consumerism”—avoiding the companies that have bent the knee to the president. Data firm Numerator found that 38% of US consumers have participated in some form of a boycott over the last year, and 48% said they would stop buying from a company that had differing political views. Some may have felt that outdoor retailer REI would be an ideal place to shop during this time, a home for like-minded, outdoorsy people who care about the environment.

As an REI worker, I’m still expected to evangelize about REI‘s mission—the outdoors, sustainability, and community. But ever since we started unionizing at REI in 2022, it’s now become a facade. REI‘s leadership has endorsed leaders who gutted public lands, greenwashed their use of AI, deployed a union-busting law firm, and rigged their governance structure to shut out different perspectives. REI, a favorite of outdoor-loving liberals, has gone Trump.

The first public sign came when REI endorsed the Trump administration directly. The executives of the “co-op,” without any direct feedback from the members whose values and opinions they claim to base their decisions on, signed a letter of support for then-nominee for Secretary of the Interior Doug Burgum, who ended up being confirmed in a vote of 79-18. In the year since his confirmation, Burgum has spent much of his time opening federal lands up to oil and gas drilling and trying to make the “Gulf of America” name stick. While REI’s new CEO has issued an apology since, the damage is already being done.

But throughout our union effort, from organizing to now bargaining, we’ve seen up close how the co-op has aligned itself with President Donald Trump. REI has met our unionization campaign by hiring a law firm with deep ties to pro-business, anti-worker cases, Morgan Lewis. This firm has been contracted to bust unions in everything from Amazon to professional baseball.

As REI has continued to stonewall us at the bargaining table, it’s opened itself up to a new opportunity for “conscious consumerism.” We have authorized a boycott should the company fail to agree on a contract with its 11 unionized stores.

Its reputation has earned the respect of the Trump administration, as the president installed Crystal Carey, a former partner at Morgan Lewis, as the general counsel for the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). In that role, Carey is responsible for setting the agenda for the NLRB as it weighs decisions on union elections, unfair labor practices, and more—including major cases regarding our union campaign. Morgan Lewis also handled the president’s taxes for many years. That’s who REI chose to hire—one of Trump’s favorite law firms.

Perhaps the most damning example of how REI is taking a page from the Trump playbook is how they’ve changed their governance structure. As a co-op, REI members elect the board of directors each year, seemingly a symbol of democratic governance and participation. Any co-op member can vote, and any member can run.

Last year, we decided to nominate two members to the board, Tefere Gebre and Shemona Moreno, longtime labor advocates, outdoor enthusiasts, and progressive leaders. Both were ideal candidates for REI’s board, but instead, their candidacies were rejected outright in favor of a slate of candidates handpicked by REI executives.

In response, we urged co-op members to vote down this slate. They responded overwhelmingly in support—members defeated the slate of candidates, and the board was left with multiple vacancies in response. An expression of will like this—again, from the very members whose values the co-op’s executives claim impact their decisions—should have prompted REI to look inward and reflect.

Instead, REI took the Trump route. REI didn’t like the results, so they changed the rules. They moved up the board election to December, after holding it in April and May for years. This came in the middle of negotiations, which prevented us from speaking out against this anti-democratic move. Holding the election over the holidays meant participation would be low, and members couldn’t hear another perspective on any of the co-op’s preferred candidates. It’s a microcosm for how Trump is trying to change the rules of our democracy with the SAVE America Act and gerrymandering.

Of course, REI isn’t alone in cowering to the president. Another major retailer, Target, has also kept its head down during the second Trump administration. The company pulled back its Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion initiatives and remained silent as Immigration and Customs Enforcement ran amok in the company’s home state of Minnesota. And Target has paid the price as it has faced boycotts from customers and protests outside its stores.

While many corporations have bowed their heads to the president, it wasn’t always this way. During the first Trump administration, we even had companies like Microsoft, Google, and Facebook speaking out against Trump’s immigration policies.

As REI has continued to stonewall us at the bargaining table, it’s opened itself up to a new opportunity for “conscious consumerism.” We have authorized a boycott should the company fail to agree on a contract with its 11 unionized stores. We do not take this decision lightly, but we know that REI members and customers have our backs in the fight for a fair contract and in the fight against Trump.


Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.


Jules Geritz
Jules Geritz is a senior sales specialist at REI’s store in Berkeley, Califoria; a 13-year REI employee; and a member of the REI Union’s national bargaining committee.
Full Bio >

Hegseth mentor Doug Wilson's vision for a Christian nation means married women can't vote

MOSCOW, Idaho (FāVS News) — During a town hall at an Idaho University, Wilson and his fellow pastors pitched a vision of America with no LGBTQ+ rights, no divorce and no voting rights for married women. Wilson has gained notoriety for his Christian nationalist views and his ties to Pete Hegseth.

People attend a town hall meeting featuring pastors Doug Wilson, seated from left, Toby Sumpter and Jared Longshore, Thursday, April 9, 2026, at the University of Idaho Administration Auditorium in Moscow, Idaho. (Photo by Tracy Simmons)

Tracy Simmons
April 10, 2026
RNS


MOSCOW, Idaho (FāVS News) — In Pastor Doug Wilson’s Christian nationalist America, there would be no minarets — only the sound of church bell towers. There would be no statues of Hindu deities or other non-Christian religious symbols in public spaces. Adultery would carry legal penalties, and Obergefell v. Hodges would be overturned. Wilson says he’s not trying to get there tomorrow. But he and his Moscow, Idaho, church are building what he calls “a working prototype.”

“What I mean by Christian nationalism is America being what it was founded to be,” said Toby Sumpter, a pastor at Christ Church, the congregation led by Wilson.

Sumpter joined Wilson and Pastor Jared Longshore, dean at New Saint Andrews College, the school run by Christ Church, at a town hall on the University of Idaho campus, where the three laid out their vision for America’s future.

The trio made national headlines last year after they appeared together in a CNN profile examining Wilson’s Christian nationalist movement and its ties to Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth.

Turnout for Thursday’s (April 9) event, hosted by Collegiate Reformed Fellowship — a student organization affiliated with Christ Church, was small and subdued compared to previous town halls, which drew standing-room-only crowds, protesters and outbursts from local residents.

At the beginning of the town hall, Longshore said the term “Christian nationalist” was slapped on Christ Church by others.

“We didn’t pick this name for ourselves — it was picked for us,” he said. “Other people slapped it on us because we said Jesus is Lord of the state.”

The pastors argued that Christian nationalism isn’t a new idea — it’s a return to America’s founding. They pointed to state constitutions that acknowledged the Christian God and held religious tests for officeholders. They said it had been done before and could be done again. A number of the original 13 colonies that made up the United States had established state churches at the founding, but those ties between church and state were cut early in the country’s history.

RELATED: Christ Church at 50: How Doug Wilson pushed Christian nationalism to the center

What would America look like for the roughly one-third of Americans who are not Christian?


Wilson claimed members of minority religions would actually have “more liberty” than they do now, though he did not elaborate. He was clear, however, about the limits. The pastors argued that what the Bible defines as sinful behavior would not be treated as private — that it has consequences for society as a whole.

“We’re living in the nuclear fallout of the destruction of the American family,” Sumpter said.

Under that framework, public celebrations of LGBTQ+ identity would not be tolerated. Wilson said Pride Month and Pride parades would receive no government support, and Obergefell v. Hodges would be overturned.

Wilson went further, offering praise for the 1969 Stonewall raids — the police action against a New York gay bar that sparked the modern LGBTQ+ rights movement. He added that said sodomy laws — which were on the books in some of the 50 states until 2003 — should be restored, though not aggressively enforced. “I would not want a sexual Gestapo,” he said.

Their vision extends beyond sexuality and into the structure of the family — including who should have the right to vote. Wilson and the other pastors also argued for cutting the number of voters. Under their model, voting rights would belong to the head of each household — not to individuals. Women in households led by a husband would not. That means women who are widowed, divorced or otherwise head of their own households would vote.

The household view is part of a broader argument made by the Reformed Christian movement Wilson is part of, which seeks to overturn the 19th Amendment, which gave women the right to vote.

“We don’t believe that the fundamental building block of society is the individual,” Wilson said. “We believe the fundamental building block of any social order is the family.”

Wilson said their own church already operates this way. In Christ Church elections, members vote by household rather than individually. He did not call for immediately repealing the 19th Amendment but said its passage was an example of federal government overreach into state elections.

The primacy of the family unit also shaped their views on marriage law. Longshore said that their vision for America would eliminate no-fault divorce, which he blamed for enabling the breakdown of the American family. Adultery would carry legal penalties, with the unfaithful spouse penalized in divorce proceedings.

He connected the issue directly to same-sex marriage, arguing that no-fault divorce represented the same radical individualism that eventually led to Obergefell.

“The fact that I can divorce my wife because she burnt the biscuits — that’s crazy,” Longshore said. “What happened to our bonds and our allegiance?”

The issue of blasphemy arose when an audience member sent in a question about the First Amendment and free speech.



Wilson drew a distinction between sincere differences of opinion — which he said should never be prosecuted — and violent public blasphemy, which he said should be treated as disturbing the peace. The pastor also acknowledged that his vision is far from reality. But he said Christ Church isn’t waiting.

“What is happening here in Moscow is building out a working prototype of what this kind of society looks like,” he said. “All of it is peaceful. But we see ourselves as being directly commissioned by the Lord in the Great Commission to disciple America.”

For those skeptical of his vision, Christian and non-Christian alike, Wilson had a simple message: Come see for yourself.

“Retain all your skepticism,” he said. “But have it be open-palm skepticism. Just visit and see — you’re going to find a lot of surprisingly normal people.”

 

’Ready to govern’ Hungary: Former ally Magyar challenges Orban with Europe gun

EXPLAINER

“We’re standing on the threshold of victory,” Peter Magyar confidently declared to thousands of cheering supporters in Budapest this weekend, kicking off the centre-right Tisza party's campaign for Hungary’s April 12 parliamentary elections. The former far-right Fidesz party insider turned defector is now Prime Minister Viktor Orban’s biggest threat after 16 years in power. FRANCE 24 lists the key stakes in what is expected to become one of Europe’s most closely watched election races this year.


Issued on: 16/02/2026 
FRANCE24
By: Louise NORDSTROM

Peter Magyar, leader of the Hungarian opposition Tisza party, launches his election campaign in Budapest, Hungary, on February 15, 2026. © Denes Erdos, AP


Who is Peter Magyar?

Forty-four-year-old Peter Magyar burst onto Hungary’s political scene in February, 2024, after having broken ranks with Orban’s Fidesz party over a child sex abuse pardon scandal that led to the resignation of his ex-wife, then justice minister Judit Varga, and then president Katalin Novak.

Magyar, who up until then had been part of Orban’s inner circle, accused the government of walking free from responsibility after letting Varga and Novak take the blame. “I don’t want to be part of a system where the real culprits hide behind women’s skirts,” he said. Shortly afterward he launched his own centre-right party, Tisza (Respect and Freedom), and vowed to crack down on corruption and bring Hungary closer to Europe.

READ MOREHungary's Peter Magyar, Orban disciple turned fierce rival

“Step by step, brick by brick, we are taking back our homeland and building a new country, a sovereign, modern, European Hungary,” Magyar said shortly after founding his party.

Just a few months later, Tisza stunned Hungary’s political establishment by securing almost 30 percent of the votes in the European parliamentary elections – cementing Magyar’s role as Orban’s most serious challenger yet.

As both contenders launched their campaigns over the weekend, Magyar’s Tisza already held a comfortable 10-point lead over Orban’s Fidesz – and has done so over the past year, according to a combined poll by Politico.

“Tisza stands ready to govern,” Magyar said at his launch event.

Why is Orban’s rule in danger?

Aside from the Fidesz “family values” brand taking a serious hit with the 2024 pardon scandal – prompting some of the party’s conservative members to defect to Tisza – Orban has been unable to to get Hungary’s bleeding economy back on track. In 2023, a presidential pardon had been secretly granted to the deputy director of a children’s home convicted of covering up a case of child sex abuse.

In the wake of Russia’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine – which pushed the country’s energy prices to the skies – Orban also introduced new income rebates, which in 2023 resulted in the worst inflationary surge in Europe, at a staggering 25 percent.

Although the worst of the financial crisis has since subsided, a Eurobarometer survey cited by Reuters last autumn showed that rising prices, inflation and cost of living still top Hungarians’ main concerns.

The state of the country’s economy has also been weighed down by the fact that the European Union has blocked some €20 billion in funds over corruption and the rule of law concerns.

The economy is in other words a sore point for Orban, and Magyar has taken every opoortunity to point that out.

Europe in focus

The real battleground in the April ballot will be the two candidates' opposing views on the EU.

While Orban last week declared that the real danger to Hungary is the EU, Magyar has gone the other way: “Hungary will once again be a full-fledged member of the European Union,” he told a Budapest rally last year, touting the EU as the answer to Hungary’s prayers, especially if it releases the withheld EU funds.

On Saturday, Orban told supporters that “Brussels … [is] a source of imminent danger”, adding that the April ballot is therefore a choice between “war and peace”, and that Fidesz, with its anti-EU stance, therefore is the only “safe choice”.

Orban's anti-establishment and nationalist views has won him support from US President Donald Trump, and on Monday US Secretary of State Marco Rubio paid him a symbolic visit, telling him "your success is our success".

READ MORERubio tells Orban ‘your success is our success’ during Hungary visit ahead of elections

Orban hopes his ties with Trump wil help him collect the votes needed to prolong his reign.

If he wins the elections, he has promised to "clear away" the "oppressive machinery of Brussels" in his country.

Views on Russia and Ukraine

Under Orban, Hungary has remained Russia’s closest EU ally throughout the war, routinely blocking any European sanction packages against what has remained – despite pleas from Europe – its main gas supplier.

He has equally tried to stonewall any military or financial aid to Ukraine. And at the end of last year, he even went as far as to say it was “unclear who attacked whom”.

Although Magyar has described Moscow as “the aggressor” in the conflict, and last year told the Financial Times he would push for an immediate ceasefire along with Hungary’s EU allies if he comes to power, he has also said he would not reverse Hungary’s current policy of non-support for Kyiv nor totally sever Budapest’s ties with Russia. He staunchly opposes fast-track EU accession for Ukraine.

"On Ukraine, Tisza’s manifesto is notably thin," an analyst note from the Brussels-based think-tank European Policy Center warned, adding that "EU leaders should not assume that a Magyar government would mark a clean break with Orban-era policies."

Rubio conveys Trump’s full support for Hungary's Orban, says bilateral ties are entering "golden age"

Marco Rubio before a joint press conference with his host Viktor Orban in Budapest on February 16. / Facebook - Viktor Orban

FacebookTwitterLinkedInTelegramFlipboardFeedly

By bne IntelliNews February 17, 2026

Bilateral relations with Hungary are entering a "golden age", and Washington would be willing to help Budapest financially if needed, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio told his Hungarian host at a joint press conference with Prime Minister Viktor Orban on February 16 in Budapest.

Rubio arrived from Bratislava after attending the Munich Security Conference over the weekend and received a warm welcome at the Carmelite Monastery, the seat of the prime minister.

At a joint press conference with Orban, the US chief diplomat said the new golden era between the two countries was due to the strong relationship between Orban and Trump.

"Hungary’s success is also our success. It is because we want you to continue, want this economy to prosper, and want this country to do well. It’s in our national interest. Especially as long as you’re the prime minister and the leader of this country, it’s in our national interest that Hungary be successful," he added.

When asked about whether ties would remain strong in case of a change of government, Rubio said the outcome of Hungary's election was up to the voters but praised Orban's "extraordinarily strong" relationship with the US, saying it had "tangible benefits" for bilateral ties and "strong personal ties between the two leaders had significantly shaped bilateral relations".

Trump has already publicly endorsed Orban, calling him "a truly strong and powerful leader" in a social media post last week, after the Hungarian prime minister had steadfastly supported him in every election since 2016.

In his opening remarks, the Hungarian premier described the meeting with Rubio as cordial, friendly and substantive, noting that the visit had been agreed during his visit to Washington last November.

Since Trump’s inauguration, 17 new US investments have been launched in Hungary, the visa programme was restored, and Hungary has been invited to join Trump's Peace Council initiative. Orban cited achievements over the last 13 months, adding that he would travel to Washington on February 19 to sign the accession declaration.

Rubio and Orban signed energy agreements that extend to crude, gas and nuclear. Those agreements, together with an exemption allowing Hungary to use Russian oil and gas, contribute to the country's energy security and keep prices affordable for households and businesses, Orban said, adding that talks also evolved around the acquisition of Serbian oil company NIS by its Hungarian peer MOL, but he did not provide more detail.

MOL plans to buy out the majority Russian stake in the company. The deal still requires approval from Washington, which is expected to be a formality.

No new details emerged on the nuclear energy deal, but based on earlier reports, Hungary committed to acquire SMR technology from the US for $20bn. Under the agreements signed last November, Budapest will also be buying $600mn in LNG to diversify its energy supplies and $700mn in military equipment.

After returning from the White House, Orban said he had reached a financial agreement with Trump. Later, his economy minister said this financial arrangement could include a swap agreement, credit lines, and infrastructure financing, designed to strengthen Hungary’s financial stability and provide a shield in times of crisis.   

Rubio cordially offered Washington’s help to its ally if needed. "When you face financial difficulties, we are ready to provide assistance. Especially while you serve as prime minister, it is in America’s national interest to maintain strong relations between our two countries, and we appreciate your efforts in furtherance of peace. Your geopolitical role is indispensable," Rubio added.

Asked by CBS News, the secretary of ctate said Hungary’s exemption from US sanctions on Russian energy imports was the result of direct talks between the two leaders, calling it a product of their strong personal ties. He declined to speculate on the future of bilateral relations in the event of a change of government in Hungary. Earlier, Rubio contradicted the government’s claims, saying the exemption was not permanent but valid for one year. 

Rubio also addressed questions concerning Hungary’s relations with China, saying every nation pursues its own national interests and that the United States did not expect partners to isolate themselves from other countries.

Analysts commented that the US diplomat was fully aligned with the Hungarian position in these two cases, without having to confront sensitive issues. Independent media also notes that Washington’s open support for Orban in the election appeared to go beyond diplomatic norms.

Analysts said the prime minister is likely to leverage his close relationship with Trump for PR, portraying himself as the reliable leader welcomed by big global players. in the final stretch of what is shaping up to be a closely contested election campaign. 

Erik Toth, the research director at the government-funded think-tank, the Centre for Fundamental Rights, also highlighted the political fallout from Rubio's visits and Trump's endorsement. Toth said he believed that the endorsement adheres to diplomatic norms and shows that the current US administration intends to continue close cooperation with the Orban government.

At the press conference, Orban said Hungary remained ready to host a future peace summit if one were to take place. He added that his invitation for Trump to visit Hungary still stands.

When asked whether the US leader would visit Hungary in the near future, Rubio said he could not confirm such plans. 

‘Outrage’ as LGBTQ Pride flag removed from Stonewall monument

By AFP
February 10, 2026


Human Rights activist Jay Walker speaks during a protest in front of the Stonewall Monument in Manhattan in New York - Copyright AFP Jim WATSON

Gregory WALTON

The removal of an LGBTQ rainbow pride flag from the United States’ most prominent gay monument after new rules issued by the Trump administration sparked an outcry and a noisy protest on Tuesday.

The removal of a large rainbow flag from the Stonewall National Monument in New York followed a January 21 memo from the federally run National Park Service responsible for the heritage site.

It banned the flying of flags other than the US national banner and the Department of the Interior’s colors, with limited exceptions.

About 100 noisy demonstrators, many draped in LGBTQ flags, gathered in a park opposite Stonewall in downtown Manhattan with attendees decrying the move as a “slap in the face” for the community.

New York Mayor Zohran Mamdani said he was “outraged” by the removal of the rainbow pride flag from the monument.

“New York is the birthplace of the modern LGBTQ+ rights movement, and no act of erasure will ever change, or silence, that history,” he wrote on X.

The Stonewall national monument memorializes the eponymous Stonewall Uprising of 1969, when LGBTQ New Yorkers rose up against discriminatory policies and oppression.

A police raid of the small Greenwich Village gay bar ignited six days of rioting that birthed the modern US gay rights movement, later extended to transgender and non-binary people, who do not identify as male or female.



– ‘Unconscionable behavior’ –



Trump regularly criticized transgender people and what he termed “gender ideology extremism” while on the campaign trail, and days after returning to office he signed an executive order declaring only two official genders in the United States, male and female.

A month later, the National Park Service scrubbed references to transgender and queer people from the website of the monument, with other government departments implementing similar purges.

“To have somebody take down something that is so meaningful to us and to our community outside a historic site like that is basically a slap in the face,” said trans community organizer Jade Runk, 37, who used cable ties to fasten LGBTQ flags to railings in Christopher Park opposite Stonewall.

“It’s a message saying ‘we don’t want you to exist’.”

The area around the Stonewall monument, including the adjacent, privately run Stonewall Inn, is still adorned with many bright LGBTQ flags, as well as banners representing the trans community.

New York state Governor Kathy Hochul said that she would “not let this administration roll back the rights we fought so hard for.”

The National Park Service did not respond to an AFP request for comment.

LGBTQ campaign group GLAAD said “attempts to censor and diminish visibility are tactics that LGBTQ Americans overcame decades ago, and we will continue to defeat.”

Gay history archivist Alec Douglas, 29, told AFP that “we’ve seen this movie before.”

“It’s just unconscionable behavior from an autocratic government to erase a minority,” said Douglas, holding up a rainbow flag from a 1994 pride march signed by the banner’s original designer, Gilbert Baker.

Manhattan Borough President Brad Hoylman-Sigal told local media he would reraise the flag at the site on Thursday.

One protester angrily shouted “Let’s do it now. What are we waiting for?”

UK

Darren Grimes mocked over false claims M&S staff are ‘forced’ to wear pronoun badges

Gabrielle Pickard-Whitehead

Yesterday
Left Foot Forward

“I'm a regular shopper at M&S and have seen no evidence of this. Perhaps you could supply some, rather than a lame third hand anecdote.”

Darren Grimes, a Reform UK councillor in Durham and former presenter on GB News, came under fire this week for claiming Marks & Spencer staff are forced to display their pronouns on name badges.

Taking to X and Facebook, Grimes wrote:

“I met someone that I worked with at Marks and Spencer many moons ago tonight – I’m so grateful for the people I met and the experience I got in that job. But I was informed that they’re all forced to wear their pronouns on their badges now. What on earth? Do they even know their own customers? Sign of the times.”

The post drew attention, as Grimes no doubt intended, but much of the reaction focused on its inaccuracy.

Several social media users challenged the assertion with firsthand accounts. One wrote:

“I was sipping coffee in M&S in Southend earlier and curiosity got the better of me. I had a look around to try and spot one of these badges with mandatory pronouns. Man behind café counter – name badge, no pronouns. Woman clearing café – name badge, no pronouns. Woman in food department – name badge, no pronouns. Woman assisting customers at self-checkout – name badge, no pronouns.”

Another responded: “Yet another bare face lie from Reform Durham Darren.”

Indeed, M&S introduced optional pronoun name badges in 2021. The initiative originated not from corporate command but from an employee suggestion submitted through the retailer’s internal ‘Suggest to Steve’ programme, which allowed staff to propose ideas directly to then CEO, Steve Rowe.

At the time, employees praised the move, with M&S explaining that the badges were intended to help staff feel comfortable at work and to support LGBTQ+ colleagues. The company stressed participation was voluntary.

The charity Stonewall also welcomed the initiative, describing it as a simple but meaningful step towards workplace inclusion.

“Creating an inclusive workplace starts with everyday actions, and having pronouns on badges is a simple yet impactful way to make sure LGBTQ+ identities are respected – for employees and customers alike,” said Sasha Misra, associate director communications at Stonewall.

Given that the voluntary nature of the badges has been public knowledge for several years, critics argued that Grimes’ claim was either careless or deliberately misleading. As one user asked: “Where did you meet this person and how much had they had to drink? I ask because I’m a regular shopper at M&S and have seen no evidence of this. Perhaps you could supply some, rather than a lame third hand anecdote.”

Nevertheless, the post did succeed in provoking some of the culture-war outrage it appeared designed to generate. Among the responses was the unrelated complaint:

“I noticed that they didn’t wear poppies for remembrance either.”

Once again, voluntary inclusion being falsely portrayed as coercive ‘wokeness,’ allowing misinformation to spread.

Trump’s assault on LGBTQ+ programmes ‘undoubtedly’ hitting UK charities, warns Stonewall

Gabrielle Pickard-Whitehead 

Today
Left Foot Forward

Stonewall's corporate donations more than halved over the past year.

Donald Trump’s ongoing attacks on LGBTQ+ programmes in the US are having a ripple effect across the Atlantic, forcing UK LGBTQ+ charities to operate in what experts describe as an increasingly “hostile environment.”

As the US rolls back diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) initiatives and freezes funding for international LGBTQ+ causes, UK organisations are already feeling the financial fallout.

Stonewall, the UK’s largest LGBTQ+ charity, says corporate donations more than halved over the past year, falling from £348,636 in 2024 to £143,149 in 2025. Its cash reserves have also dropped sharply, with less than £92,000 remaining, compared with £998,000 the previous year.

Stonewall attributes the decline to a combination of factors, including the cost-of-living crisis, wider economic pressures affecting charitable giving, and a global pushback against DEI initiatives.

Heather Paterson, head of partnerships and development at LGBT+ Consortium, an umbrella organisation supporting LGBTQ+ groups, said Trump’s decision to freeze foreign aid for LGBTQ+ programmes has “undoubtedly affected fundraising efforts in the UK.”

“This is against a backdrop of increasing running costs, a huge growth in support needs and increasing threats of legal challenges,” she said.

Paterson added that in a political climate where support for trans rights and wider LGBTQ+ equality is increasingly framed as controversial, some businesses have become more cautious about where they direct funding. She said funders are also reporting growing levels of negative feedback when they donate to LGBTQ+ causes.

Since returning to office, Trump has enacted a series of measures targeting LGBTQ+ communities, including banning transgender people from serving in the military, shutting down LGBTQ+ youth services and refusing to recognise Pride Month. Campaigners warn these policies are undermining international LGBTQ+ rights programmes and emboldening opposition elsewhere.

In its Annual Report 2024/25, Stonewall noted how the UK was once seen as a global leader on LGBTQ+ rights. “Sadly, that is no longer the case,” the report states.

“Globally, the LGBTQ+ movement, along with a whole range of other social justice and human rights issues, is experiencing a period of significant turbulence, with rights and freedoms being contested – particularly for the trans and non-binary communities. There have been significant reductions, in the UK and around the world, in funding for the movement,” it continued.