Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

LGBTQ Refugees Came to America To Escape Discrimination. Now, They Live in Fear in the U.S.

News

LGBTQ Refugees Came to America To Escape Discrimination. Now, They Live in Fear in the U.S.
blue and yellow abstract painting
Photo by Steve Johnson on Unsplash

Salvadoran refugee Alberto, who is using a pseudonym out of safety concerns, did not feel secure in his own home. Being a gay man in a country known for state-sponsored violence and community rejection meant Alberto lived his life on high alert.

His family did not accept him. He says one family member physically attacked him because of his identity. He says he has been followed, harassed, and assaulted by police, accused of crimes he didn’t commit when he was studying to become a social worker. His effort to escape the rejection in his community left him, at one point, homeless and lost in a new city.


He sought help from the LGBTQ refugee resettlement program Rainbow Railroad to find a new home in the United States, a place renowned for its progressive advancement of LGBTQ rights. He is one of thousands of LGBTQ refugees from around the world who have been forced to flee their homes due to persecution and violence because of who they are or who they love.

“It's a second chance that I think life is giving me,” said Alberto, about resettling in the U.S.

However, many of those who have relocated to the United States, like Alberto, are caught at the intensifying intersections of discrimination and criminalization of asylum seekers and LGBTQ residents here in America.

“I felt safe to live here, but I don't feel safe with this administration, because for me, being a Latino, gay, I had some concerns about the situation for my community, for myself too,” he said, who has been in the U.S. since 2023.

Around the country, masked ICE agents have been seen arresting migrants and asylum seekers who appeared for their scheduled court hearings. Even those with legal residency or those with visas have been subject to detention and arrest by federal law enforcement agents.

The Trump administration has repeatedly deemed immigrants and asylum seekers “criminals,” even those without a criminal record, who have paid taxes to the federal government and/or are seeking asylum.

ICE has reported more than 60,000 removals since the inauguration. Migrant detention camps are expanding and popping up at the behest of the Trump administration in states like Florida and Texas. ICE raids have terrorized communities across the nation.

Alberto is in the middle of his own interview process with United States Citizenship and Immigration Services, but it feels increasingly dangerous to attend even these routine check-ins: “I feel very worried, honestly, because I was watching many videos of the people who come for the appointments, and they have been arrested.”

He continued, “I did not cross the border, and I came with all documents, but nothing is secure with this administration. They can change the ideas whenever they want.”

For Alberto and others like him, this fear is compounded by the growing political and social hostility toward the LGBTQ community.

The ACLU is tracking 598 anti-LGBTQ bills across the country this year alone. GLAAD, a national LGBTQ media advocacy organization, tracked almost 1,000 anti-LGBTQ incidents in 2024, including bomb threats, acts of vandalism, assaults, and more.

Over the last year, the Rainbow Railroad received the most requests for assistance from callers in the United States, surpassing any other country.

National activist group Human Rights Campaign declared a “National State of Emergency for LGBTQ+ Americans” just last year, and created resources for those looking to move out of their state or the country.

“What we're seeing now could just be the start of the worst that is yet to come,” said Latoya Nugent, Rainbow Railroad’s Head of Engagement. “We are very fearful that in the next three and a half or four years that we may be in a world where we may not even recognize the U.S.”

The change in the dynamic was almost immediate after the inauguration. Rainbow Road’s refugee admissions programs were suspended, and similar global programs that addressed public needs connected to the LGBTQ community ground to a halt – from USAID to the U.N. LGBTI Core Group.

“The U.S. is a powerful actor in the global humanitarian protection system,” said Nugent. “It's not just what is happening in the US, but it's also the impact globally on the work that has been happening over the years.”

The new efforts by the Trump administration to turn back progress on LGBTQ and immigrant rights have increasingly exhausted and drained these already vulnerable populations fighting for their ability to stay safe and alive here in the U.S.

LGBTQ advocacy groups are preparing for the worst, as the changing legal and social U.S. landscape presents unknowns for the future of refugee resettlement and LGBTQ life in America.

“We are also seeing the community really rally around some of the most vulnerable people, including LGBTQ asylum seekers and refugees, recognizing that if we don't hold the line right now, things could become significantly worse,” said Nugent.

Still, many places in the U.S. are a beacon of hope for the queer and transgender community, especially those who hail from countries where they’d be persecuted for those identities. More than 60 countries currently criminalize the LGBTQ community. Individuals in these countries are often faced with state-sponsored violence, family violence, and societal rejection.

For Alberto, moving to Chicago has been a life-changing experience. Rainbow Railroad helped him find stability and build a support system of local connections that share in his experiences. He’s holding these positive moments close to his heart, which has helped him cope with the growing pressures of the political arena.

“For the first time in my life, I can live. I can feel, I'm feeling free to to be who I am, express my identity, who I am, and without concern over thoughts about who I am, and that's made me feel happy,” Alberto said.

Kiara Alfonseca is a reporter and producer with nearly a decade of experience reporting on the intersections of politics and identity.


Read More

An empty grocery cart in a market.

NYC Mayor Zohran Mamdani proposes five city-run grocery stores. See the arguments for and against, from food deserts to bodega concerns and the $70M cost.

Getty Images, Kwangmoozaa

Government-Owned Grocery Stores: Accessible Nutrition or Government Overreach?

Issue Introduction

Over the past few years, affordability has become the most central issue affecting Americans and the quality of life in the United States. The prices of groceries and basic necessities have risen 25-30% since the COVID-19 pandemic and are projected to rise another 3.2% in 2026. At the same time, the exodus of grocery chains from rural and low-income areas has scattered food deserts throughout individual states. Recent mass closures include Grocery Outlet’s shuttering of 36 stores and continued shut-downs of many Albertsons locations. These factors have led politicians to make affordability a major campaign issue.

During his progressive campaign for mayor of New York City, Zohran Mamdani raised the idea of opening grocery stores owned and operated by the city government to provide New Yorkers with affordable groceries. In his April 2026 public address that marked his first 100 days in office, Mayor Mamdani announced plans for the first of five city-run grocery stores. Mamdani’s proposed initiative will use $70 million in capital funding to build five city-owned municipal stores–one in each borough–and place them under control of the New York City Economic Development Corporation (NYCEDC). NYCEDC will then select third-party operating staff in accordance with city standards for affordability and proper labor practices. Public opinion following the announcement continues to be divided between uproar and support.

Keep ReadingShow less
​U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth

U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth testifies during a Senate Committee on Appropriations hearing on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C., on July 21, 2026. Hegseth is crafting a strong and masculine identity for his audience as he reportedly contemplates a presidential run.

(Alex Wroblewski/AFP/Getty Images/TNS)

Politicians Can’t Just ’Give the People What They Want’

For reasons that will baffle my many detractors, I am often asked for advice about being an opinion journalist. One of my standard responses is: You have to be willing to disappoint your biggest fans.

What I mean is that if you start to see your job as telling fans what they want to hear, you risk becoming an entertainer rather than a thinker, and eventually you become a caricature. I’ve seen it happen numerous times. Patrick Buchanan was a brilliant columnist and a serious person. But over the course of his career, he listened too much to the people who said, “Go Pat, go!” and too little to friends who said, “I think that’s taking it too far.”

Keep ReadingShow less
White marble exterior of the United States Capitol, often called the Capitol Building, is the home of the United States Congress and the seat of the legislative branch of the U.S. federal government

Congress approval is at a record-low 10%. Moderation and consensus-building, not partisan theatrics, are how Washington gets problems solved.

Richard Sharrocks / Getty Images

Reclaiming the Politics of the Possible

Washington is stuck in a cycle of performative conflict. The incentives seem to reward outrage, not outcomes that last; purity tests, not problem‑solving. So it’s no surprise that after three shutdowns in less than a year, public approval of Congress collapsed to just 10 percent this spring. (Gallup, April 2026.) But the country we live in — where many middle-income families report persistent financial strain and businesses are navigating unprecedented technological upheaval — cannot be governed by theatrics. Breaking this cycle requires moderation, consensus‑building, and a cooperative approach to governance.

This is not a call for centrism as an ideology. Instead, this is a call for transformative leaders to embrace moderation as their governing strategy, recognizing that in a pluralistic country of nearly 350 million people durable solutions require broad and stable alliances. Ultimately, this is a call for the 240 million of us who are eligible to vote in November to elect consensus-builders instead of bomb-throwers, and healers instead of arsonists.

Keep ReadingShow less
Adult man holds a microphone while asking a question during a town hall meeting.

Congress ignored 90% of public support for background checks. Learn how citizen assemblies and sortition helped Ireland break gridlock and could work in the US.

SDI Productions/Getty Images

Consensus Without Power: How Sortition Could Break America's Legislative Gridlock

In April 2013, four months after the Sandy Hook Elementary shooting killed twenty children, the US Senate voted on the Manchin-Toomey Act to expand background checks and to include gun-show and internet sales of firearms. Roughly nine in ten Americans, including a majority of gun owners, supported the bill—a figure that has held steady across more than a decade of polling. It fell short of the 60-vote threshold by six votes. This was not an outlier. On complex issues, representatives often fail to translate public consensus into reality. Research shows that legislators consistently vote in line with donor and interest group preferences over constituent opinion. Before the vote, the National Rifle Association (NRA) warned every senator it would “rate” their vote on its annual rating system, and a low NRA rating could cost senators their next primary. Consequently, the bill died 54-46, and the majority of Americans watched, powerless, as their consensus was overridden by self-interested representatives.

Liberal democracies need a method to bypass electoral incentives that run counter to public opinion. One already exists: Ireland faced the same stalemate on complex issues before it instituted a process called sortition. The beauty of sortition lies in its removal of the primary pressure that misaligns representatives’ interests from public interest: reelection. Much like jury duty, citizens are randomly drawn from the population. An independent body then stratifies the pool, so the final group mirrors the country by age, gender, geography, and income. The group meets over weeks or months, hearing from experts and the public, as well as debating frequently. At the end, it issues a recommendation that parliament may then put to a referendum or pass into law.

Keep ReadingShow less