LGBT

Andrea Lucas Leads the EEOC: Restoring Agency With Truth and Commonsense

Andrea Lucas, chair of the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), has been handed the enormous responsibility of restoring the agency and ensuring it carries out its statutory mandate.

The EEOC

The EEOC, once led by Clarence Thomas, is a bipartisan commission composed of five members who are nominated by the president and confirmed by the Senate. By statute, no more than three commissioners can be members of the same political party.

The agency is at its best when it carries out its legal mandate to ensure all Americans are treated equally under law. The EEOC is responsible for enforcing the nation’s employment laws which protect job applicants and employees from being discriminated against because of their race, color, religion, sex, age or disability.

Created by Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the agency’s mission and scope have been modified multiple times by subsequent pieces of legislation.

The Obama and Biden administrations, however, transformed the agency into a center of leftist ideological activism. Until now.

Chair Lucas Takes the Helm

Lucas was nominated to serve as an EEOC commissioner by President Donald J. Trump during his first term and was confirmed by the U.S. Senate on September 22, 2020, just a few months before former President Joseph R. Biden took office.

“It was a long time in the wilderness as a commissioner during the Biden administration,” Chair Lucas said in an exclusive interview with the Daily Citizen. “I like to joke that I was in, but not of, the Biden administration,” she quipped, referencing John 17: 14-19.

After President Trump’s second inauguration, Lucas was re-nominated for a second term and confirmed by the Senate on July 31, 2025. On November 5, President Trump designated her as chair of the EEOC to lead a newly established Republican majority on the commission.

EEOC Chair Andrea Lucas. Photo courtesy of the EEOC.

For much of Lucas’ time on the EEOC, the agency was run by a Democrat-nominated majority of commissioners. But the EEOC’s ideological activism extends even further back than the Biden administration.

EEOC’s Ideological Activism

When Congress passed the Civil Rights Act of 1964, it created Title VII specifically to protect individuals from employment discrimination on the basis of “sex” – being male or female. Specifically, it was enacted to protect women from discrimination. Not transgender-identified or homosexual-identified individuals.

In 2010, former President Barack Obama nominated LGBT activist Chai Feldblum to fill a vacancy on the five-person EEOC commission. Once asked about what should happen when religious liberty and “sexual liberty” conflict, Feldblum conceded, “I’m having a hard time coming up with any case in which religious liberty should win.”

Commissioner Feldblum guided the EEOC on a course of using its own “guidance” letters and the court system to coerce and compel employers to redefine “sex” as “sexual orientation” and “gender identity” for purposes of Title VII. The EEOC went after employers for alleged discrimination against homosexual-identified and transgender-identified individuals.

As just one example, the EEOC sued Thomas Rost, owner of Harris Funeral Homes, a fifth generation family business, for firing a male employee named Anthony Stephens who refused to comply with the business’ sex-specific dress code after he began identifying as “transgender.”

The suit led to the Supreme Court’s Bostock decision in 2020, holding that Title VII prohibits employers from firing individuals for identifying as transgender or homosexual.

In effect, this undermined Congress’ legitimacy and ignored the original understanding of what “sex” means.

Under the Biden administration, it got worse. The EEOC attempted to essentially erase “sex” as a protected class altogether.

The Harassment Guidance

On April 29, 2024, the EEOC voted 3-2 to update its “Enforcement Guidance on Harassment in the Workplace” (Harassment Guidance) which would have officially redefined “sex” in Title VII to include “sexual orientation” and “gender identity.”

The radical guidance would have ended many workplace protections for millions of Americans, especially women, by:

  • Ending sex-segregated spaces in workplaces by allowing transgender-identified employees to use whatever bathroom, locker room and shower they prefer.
  • Mandating millions of Americans speak in false and anti-scientific terms by requiring employees to refer to their coworkers using their “preferred pronouns.”
  • Specifying that intentionally and repeatedly “misgendering” or “deadnaming” a coworker creates a “hostile work environment.”

The guidance would have also made it more likely faith-based employers would be sued for not mandating “preferred pronoun” use or permitting males to access women’s spaces.

“The guidance made clear what the commission viewed as unlawful harassment,” Lucas told us, “And that increases the liability risk as a practical matter to every single employer, including faith-based employers.”

At the time, Commissioner Lucas courageously dissented from the agency’s decision.

“Women’s sex-based rights in the workplace are under attack – and from the EEOC, the very federal agency charged with protecting women from sexual harassment and sex-based discrimination at work,” Commissioner Lucas said after the guidance was released.

She added,

In issuing this guidance, the EEOC ignores biological reality; dismisses the sex-based privacy and safety needs of women; disregards decades of safeguarding principles for women and girls; and fundamentally betrays its mission.

Lucas admitted that, while being in the minority on the commission under the Biden administration was difficult, “I think it’s really important to dissent and to have used my bully pulpit for good.”

“The Harassment Guidance was an unlawful document and overstepped our authority,” she told us. “Biology is not bigotry. There are two sexes.”

Thankfully, the updated Harassment Guidance was quickly challenged in court and never enforced.

On January 22, 2026, the EEOC voted 2-1 to rescind the updated Harassment Guidance with Commissioner Brittany Panuccio, a nominee of President Trump, joining Chair Lucas in voting for the rescission, and Commissioner Kalpana Kotagal, a nominee of former President Biden, dissenting. Two seats on the EEOC remain vacant.

No longer do Americans have to worry about their rights being attacked by the EEOC. With Chair Lucas at the helm, the EEOC is embarking on a much-needed course correction.

A New Day and New Priorities at the EEOC

Chair Lucas is proceeding with crucial priorities at the agency, protecting all people – including white males – from discrimination.

“Our doors are open for everyone,” Lucas said. “Our nation’s civil rights laws are race-neutral, sex-neutral and group-neutral under Title VII.”

“Despite that, in the last administration, and even for decades, there has been a strong presumption that the civil rights laws are only available for ‘minority workers’ or ‘historically underrepresented workers’ and not available to anybody who experiences race or sex discrimination,” she explained.

While the EEOC will continue to investigate discrimination that takes place against anyone, Lucas said, “It’s important for groups like white men who have been told that our doors are closed to them, to know that they’re not. We’re open. We’re going to take their concerns seriously.”

Lucas encouraged white men who believe they have experienced discrimination to reach out to the EEOC.

“We’re going to the defend the rights of everyone,” she said, “not just some favored groups.”

Lucas divulged the EEOC will crack down on any Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) policy “whenever it involves race or sex discrimination.”

“To the extent any employment policy, whether it’s a DEI, Belonging, or Inclusion Policy, if it is functioning to engage in race or sex discrimination, that’s unlawful,” Lucas shared.

Chair Lucas also encouraged conservative individuals, who may be hesitant to request civil rights protections, to be open to contacting the EEOC.

“If your rights have been trampled on, whether its race or religious discrimination, you do have rights,” she said. “You can help protect yourself and others by exercising your rights. In an increasingly post-Christian world, it may be more imperative to be aware of what rights you have.”

A Personal Reflection

Before being nominated to the U.S. Supreme Court by former President George H.W. Bush, Clarence Thomas served as the eighth chair of the EEOC for eight years.

Asked what it’s like to serve in his former position, Chair Lucas confessed with a grin, “It’s really cool.”

“He’s a personal hero of mine. He’s amazing, and that’s always a really special part of this job,” she added. “I’m constantly inspired by him. It’s an honor. I have big shoes to fill.”

Related articles and resources:

Eighteen States Sue EEOC Over Workplace Mandates Endangering Women and Free Speech

EEOC Releases Major Guidance Ending Many Workplace Protections for Women

EEOC Chair Accused of ‘Sleight of Hand’ in Unilaterally Issuing Misleading Gender Guidelines for Employers

‘Not Only Arrogant, But Wrong’: Justice Alito Slams SCOTUS Majority for Redefining ‘Sex’

The Justice Department Urges Supreme Court Not to Redefine Sex to Mean Gender Identity

Supreme Court Will Hear Redefinition of “Sex” Cases in October

Supreme Court Will Review Requests to Redefine the Word “Sex”

Chai Feldblum Exits EEOC — Why That’s Good for Religious Liberty

Photo from Shutterstock.

Montgomery County Must Pay $1.5 Million to Religious Parents After Supreme Court Ruling

The Montgomery County Board of Education will pay $1.5 million in damages to religious parents for trampling parental rights and trying to indoctrinate their children with LGBT content. The school board will also comply with court-enforced protections for parental rights.

The settlement comes after the Supreme Court ruled in June 2025 in Mahmoud v. Tayler that schools can’t force children to participate in LGBT classroom material without giving parents the right to opt out their children based on their religious beliefs.

“Public schools nationwide are on notice: running roughshod over parental rights and religious freedom isn’t just illegal – it’s costly,” Eric Baxter, senior counsel at Becket and lead attorney for the parents, said in a statement.

Baxter added,

This settlement enforces the Supreme Court’s ruling and ensures parents, not government bureaucrats, have the final say in how their children are raised.

The case stems from Montgomery County school board’s 2022 decision to use several LGBT children’s books in preschool through 12th grade language arts curricula. These books promote “gender transitioning, Pride parades, and pronoun preferences to children as young as three and four,” Becket, which represents the parents, states.

One book, Prince & Knight, “conveys the message that same-sex marriage should be accepted by all as a cause for celebration,” Justice Samuel Alito recounted in the Mahmoud decision.

A second book, Uncle Bobby’s Wedding, presents the message that “two people can get married, regardless of whether they are of the same or the opposite sex.”

Another book, IntersectionAllies: We Make Room for All, portrays a “transgender child in a sex-ambiguous bathroom” and “includes a discussion guide that asserts … ‘at any point in our lives, we can choose to identify with one gender, multiple genders, or neither gender.’” The book asks very young readers, “What pronouns fit you best?”

Yet another book, Born Ready, follows the story of Penelope, a biological female, who begs her mother to help her be a boy: “Please help me, Mama. Help me to be a boy.” After her mother agrees, Penelope exclaims, “For the first time, my insides don’t feel like fire. They feel like warm, golden love.”

The implication is that “it is seriously harmful to deny a gender transition and that transitioning is a highly positive experience,” Alito summarized.

When the school board first approved the curricula, it notified parents and allowed them to opt their children out of the material. In 2023, however, the district revised its policies and eliminated opt-outs.

Multiple religious families – including Muslims, Christians and Jews – successfully challenged the policy, arguing it violated their First Amendment right to freely exercise their religion.

In the Mahmoud decision, Justice Alito, writing for the Court’s majority, said, “The right of parents ‘to direct the religious upbringing of their’ children would be an empty promise if it did not follow those children into the public school classroom.”

“The Board’s introduction of the ‘LGBTQ+-inclusive’ storybooks – combined with its decision to withhold notice to parents and to forbid opt outs – substantially interferes with the religious development of their children,” Justice Alito concluded.

Now, the school board will pay a $1.5 million settlement, and a permanent injunction requires the board to “provide parents with advance notice when instructional materials addressing family life and human sexuality will be used and allow parents to opt their children out of that instruction.”

According to Becket’s 2025 Religious Freedom Index, 62% of Americans support the Court’s decision in Mahmoud.

“It took tremendous courage for these parents to stand up to the School Board and take their case all the way to the Supreme Court,” Baxter said. “Their victory reshaped the law and ensured that generations of religious parents will be able to guide their children’s upbringing according to their faith.”

To speak with a family help specialist or request resources, please call us at 1-800-A-FAMILY (232-6459).

Related articles and resources:

Resources: Sex Education

Talking About Sex And Puberty With Your Kids

How to Equip Your Teens with a Biblical Understanding of Sexuality

‘Equipping Parents For Back-To-School’ – Updated Resource Empowers Parents

Supreme Court Defends Religious Freedom, Parental Rights Over ‘LGBT’ Curriculum

Supreme Court Sympathetic to Opt-Outs for LGBT Curriculum

Photo from Shutterstock.

‘LGBTQ+’ Identity Likely Hits Peak Saturation in U.S.

Data continues to demonstrate we have likely hit the apex of trans and queer identity in the United States. That is worth celebrating.

The idea that anyone can be an “LGBTQ+” person — with all of its self-contradictory and exclusionary letters — is incoherent. Leading activists have been admitting this for years.

But young people have been adopting this “identity” in increasing numbers, often without any demonstrable evidence for their claim. They just claim it. This ever-expansive alphabet soup became an increasingly trendy political identifier, rather than anything denoting any actual change in behavior.

Liberal comedian Bill Maher famously poked fun at this reality years ago.

Gallup reported LGBT identification ticked up to 7.1% in 2022 from just 3.5% ten years earlier. Of course,  just ten years or more before that, hardly anyone identified this way because the ridiculous, ever-growing string of letters was just being invented. But it wasn’t done rising. Gallup reported it reached 9.3% in 2025.

Gallup is now reporting LGBT identification has declined slightly for first time since its relatively recent creation, from 9.3% last year to 9.0% today.

Other data supports this welcome development.

Late last year, the Daily Citizen reported here and here that “trans” identity and gender ideology was thankfully slipping among young Americans. This data came from University of Buckingham’s Eric Kaufmann, who documented “the decline of trans and queer identity among Young Americans” and San Diego State University scholar Jean Twenge’s finding that “identifying as nonbinary is in free fall among teens as young as 13.”

She added,

With three nationally representative samples showing a decline in transgender or nonbinary identity since 2023, its clear things have shifted just in the last few years. And now we know the change isn’t just among young adults – it extends to even the youngest teens.

The false shine of gender ideology appears to be fading.

We can pray this means we will never see as many of our young people supporting deceptive and meaningless “LGBTQ+” politics as we saw last year. Afterall, you can only artificially prop up a lie for so long. Eventually, it reveals itself for what it is. 

This is precisely what is happening with gender ideology.

Additional Resources:

A Singularly Christian View of the Transgender Problem

Why Christians Can’t Avoid the “Trans” and Gender Redefinition Issue

Yes, Transgenderism is a False Belief System

What Does it Mean to Be Trans, Anyway?

How the “Trans” and Gender Redefinition Issue Attacks the Family

Do Not Fall for the ‘Affirm Them or They Will Die’ Lie

Human Rights Campaign Trains Candidates Nationwide on Selling Gender Lies

It is an increasingly tough job for liberal candidates to put a reasonable face on gender ideology which is sacred to their political cause and worldview. This becomes even harder when politicians like the European Parliament erased the meaning of women and pregnancy in two overwhelming votes last week. Women parliamentarians stunningly cheered their own erasure. So much for women’s empowerment. 

It’s bonkersville out there. Now, the Human Rights Campaign (HRC) is only doubling down. 

The largest sexuality and gender redefinition organization in the world has just released its new report seeking to help radical politicians make gender lies seem wholly democratic and reasonable. Entitled, “One Year Out: LGBTQ+ Messaging Playbook for the Midterms,” this is the trans movement’s admission their message has been a millstone to their political fortunes. 

Kelley Robinson (she/her!), president of the Human Rights Campaign, admits the problem is large enough that it demands this report. She confesses she has a significant number of liberal candidates come to her asking, “What do I do when they come after me for supporting LGBTQ+ people?”

First, no people are LGBTQ+. It is logically impossible and self-contradictory for anyone to be all those letters. It is a meaningless category describing no one. Even celebrated founders of that movement are admitting that ever-expanding alphabet soup is silly and incoherent.

Second, this question demonstrates that speaking truth against gender lies is working. Gender activists are doing our work for us, amply revealing how they are trying to change the natural gravity of what it means to be human as male and female. People are seeing how this harms reality, as well as the meaning of marriage, parenting and the family itself.

This has been hurting liberal candidates, HRC’s president tells her fellow extremists it’s time to double-down and keep peddling the same confusion:

But let me be blunt about something else: We need candidates who are willing to take a risk. We need allies willing to speak out. We have no use for politicians who believe in equality in private but go mute when the cameras turn on.

They go mute, not because they don’t believe in gender ideology. They do. They go mute because they cannot defend the indefensible. Gay politics is not about inequality, but redefinition. It always has been. Redefining sexuality, marriage, the family and now male and female themselves.

People clearly see that the trans movement is a disturbed men’s movement to take over the very definition of womanhood and everything that is uniquely and powerfully feminine. They know “birthing people” is ridiculously offensive. “Chest feeding” is an affront to mothers. “People who menstruate” erases women in basic biology and physiology. Everyone knows “Caitlyn” Jenner and Dylan Mulvaney are guys, but we are all expected to play along to be nice.

LGBT redefinition of basic reality leads to madness like this:

HRC tells candidates, “Stop playing defense and start leading with conviction” and “don’t let them define you – define yourself.”  

They are clearly worried about how their issues will play in the coming midterms, warning, “Anti-equality candidates [read: people who know what a man and woman are] remain convinced that scapegoating transgender Americans is winning tactic.”

This is their strategy. They always make it personal, about “victims,” while reasonable people make it about reality. But that is their schtick and they are “schticking” with it. HRC’s report cries:

The midterm races have already begun. And despite the results of the 2025 elections, anti-equality candidates are at it again – running campaigns based on bigotry.

Yet HRC is furiously conducting message testing “in battleground U.S. House districts to identify the most effective messaging.” This is their own confession that what they have been doing to date has not been working. So, they explain, “After analyzing the results, we have developed a five-part framework for midterm candidates.” 

This is their strategy in a colorful graph that doesn’t really say anything beyond “Keep doing what you’ve been doing, just do it harder and louder!”

HRC reports they are holding trainings on their tactics around the country “in the coming months, and we also plan to deploy organizers to help campaigns in real time.” This is a sure sign they realize their message has not been resonating. Americans should be assured that truth is winning. Redefining male and female is not a winning message and never will be. But that is what the “LGBTQ” mission is and they are fully committed to it. 

Additional Resources

A Singularly Christian View of the Transgender Problem

Why Christians Can’t Avoid the “Trans” and Gender Redefinition Issue

Yes, Transgenderism is a False Belief System

What Does it Mean to Be Trans, Anyway?

How the “Trans” and Gender Redefinition Issue Attacks the Family

Do Not Fall for the ‘Affirm Them or They Will Die’ Lie

Jury Awards $2 Million to Young Woman Who Underwent ‘Transgender’ Surgery at 16

A New York jury awarded Fox Varian $2 million dollars in a malpractice lawsuit against medical professionals who attempted to socially and surgically “transition” her to look like the opposite sex. 

This is the first time a “detransitioner” has won a medical malpractice suit against those who caused irreversible psychological and physical damage to a person struggling with sexual identity confusion. 

Varian underwent a double mastectomy in 2019 when she was only 16 years old, hardly competent to consent to an operation that left her with scarring, ongoing pain, and the inability to ever nurse a child. 

Four years after her surgery, she filed a lawsuit against her psychologist, Kenneth Einhorn, who had written a referral letter to Dr. Simon Chin, the surgeon who performed the double mastectomy on the teenager.    

Writing at The Free Press, Benjamin Ryan explained that the jury decision hinged on “whether the care providers failed to observe standard safeguards and whether any deviations from those standards injured the patient.”

Ryan reported that Varian was 15 when “she began questioning her gender during sessions with her psychologist.” Born Isabella, she first changed her name to Gabriel, identifying as androgynous. 

“Over the next two months,” Ryan explained, “she cut her hair short, began binding her breasts, switched her name again, to Rowan, and started telling people she was transgender.” 

Finally, only “11 months after she started this public social transition, Varian underwent surgery to remove her breasts.” 

Ryan evinced sympathy for Varian’s mother Claire Deacon, who was pressured to approve the surgery, reporting: 

Varian testified that Einhorn served as an enabler, repeatedly assuring her that the mastectomy she desired would greatly improve her well-being. Deacon testified that Einhorn browbeat her into consenting to her daughter’s surgery, threatening that she would otherwise commit suicide.

“Varian’s attorney Adam Deutsch had asked the jury for $8 million in damages,” The Epoch Times reported, adding that the jury award included “$1.6 million for past and future pain and suffering, and another $400,000 for future medical expenses.” 

Ryan attended all three weeks of the jury trial in White Plains and said this verdict “could change gender medicine,” adding, “There are nearly 30 known civil suits filed by detransitioners to date (the first was filed in 2022), almost all of them malpractice cases structured similarly to Varian’s.”

He explained: 

While there are no guarantees in medical malpractice lawsuits, legal experts believe Varian’s victory could inspire a wave of similar cases that would significantly disrupt pediatric gender medicine.

Other young women who were damaged by “transgender” drugs, hormones and surgeries, and who have filed lawsuits against medical institutions and professionals who harmed them, applauded the jury decision. 

Chloe Cole filed a lawsuit in 2023 alleging that Kaiser Foundation Hospitals, The Permanente Medical Group and three doctors had improperly treated her sexual identity confusion with chemical and surgical interventions, leaving her with “deep physical and emotional wounds, severe regrets, and distrust of the medical system.”

Doctors prescribed powerful puberty blockers and testosterone to Cole when she was only 13, performing a radical double mastectomy on her when she was only 15. 

Cole stated in a post on X, “I couldn’t be more happy for Fox Varian. Detransitioners need justice.” 

Prisha Mosley is another young woman who filed a lawsuit alleging medical fraud against those who used chemical and medical interventions in an attempt to make her look more like a male. Her lawsuit stated: 

Instead of telling Prisha the truth and informing her accurately and fully, Defendants lied to Prisha. They lied when they told Prisha she was actually a boy; they lied when they told her that injecting testosterone into her body would solve her numerous, profound mental and psychological health problems. …  And they lied by omission, withholding critical information from her about the long-term adverse health consequences and permanent damage these “treatments” would cause her, and failing to inform her of alternative courses of treatment for her psychological problems and ensure she had a clear understanding of those alternatives.

Part of her case was dismissed, but Mosley has appealed that decision. 

In an appearance on The Ingraham Angle, Mosley told Laura Ingraham how encouraged she was by the jury’s award to Varian: 

I think this sets an incredible precedent for detransitioners like me, who are trying to hold our doctors accountable. To see a win, an agreement from a jury that this patient was wronged, especially in a blue state like New York, is especially encouraging for detransitioners like me.

As Christians, we must have compassion on children — and adults — wrestling with sexual identity confusion. But true compassion means protecting strugglers from harmful and damaging drugs, hormones and surgeries.

Legal victories can’t undo the irreversible damage caused by these treatments. But, as legal experts told Benjamin Ryan, “Major jury awards could drive up malpractice insurance rates and perhaps even drive providers who fear reputational damage out of the field entirely.”

Related articles and resources: 

DOJ Targets Those Mutilating Children with ‘Transgender’ Drugs and Surgeries

Do Not Fall for the ‘Affirm Them or They Will Die’ Lie

Expert in ‘Transitioning’ Children Admits ‘We Were Wrong’ About Puberty Blockers

Focus on the Family: Counseling Consultation & Referrals

Focus on the Family: Transgender Resources

Four Brave Young Women File Lawsuits Alleging Harm from ‘Transgender’ Interventions

More Hospitals Stop Mutilation of Sexually Confused Children

New Video Equips Parents and Counselors to Help ‘Gender Dysphoric’ Children

ReFOCUS with Jim Daly: Addressing Gender Identity with Honesty and Compassion

ReFOCUS with Jim Daly: Chloe Cole: Gender Reassignment Surgery Regret

Transgenderism and Minors: What Does the Research Really Show?