White Supremist preaches hate and fear in church…
https://migrantinsider.com/p/exclusive-two-dhs-sources-confirm
The Chicago-based agent was already identified on social media and by Unraveled Press. Now, two Department of Homeland Security sources have confirmed his name to Migrant Insider.










Stacey Sloughfy is a travel writer who specializes in destinations, road trips, and travel planning. Her passion for exploring began with her first international trip to Japan, where she discovered a love for experiencing different cultures and seeing the world from new perspectives. Since then, she has traveled extensively throughout the United States and abroad, helping readers discover inspiring destinations and memorable travel experiences.
Prior to contributing to TheTravel, Stacey wrote content for GoAbroad and WeSaidGoTravel. When she is not travel writing, she can often be found tending her garden, blogging, or planning her next adventure.
This article was updated on August 7 at 12:48 PM EST with a statement sent to TheTravel from Southwest Airlines
A U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agent trying to board a Southwest Airlines flight in Dallas was reportedly stopped by a gate agent who demanded a judicial warrant before allowing the agent onto the aircraft. The July 25 incident could signal a growing pushback from airlines as immigration enforcement at U.S. airports increases.
ICE has been arresting more travelers at airports amid a new information-sharing arrangement with the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), which has been providing ICE with passenger flight information.
Now, a report from The Wall Street Journal suggests Southwest employees are drawing a line when ICE agents attempt to access aircraft or passenger information without the documentation the airline requires.
Southwest Airlines Pushes Back Against ICE Enforcement At Dallas Love Field Airport
The incident happened at Dallas Love Field Airport on July 25 when an ICE agent attempted to board a Southwest flight headed from Dallas to Orlando to make an arrest, but a Southwest gate agent reportedly refused to allow the agent onto the aircraft without a judicial warrant signed by a judge.
Southwest employees also reportedly refused to provide ICE with passenger information or allow agents to view a computer screen displaying passenger information as travelers boarded the flight. The ICE agent reportedly had an administrative warrant, which was signed by an ICE supervisor rather than an independent judge.
Southwest did not comment specifically on the reported Dallas incident but provided TheTravel with a statement outlining how the airline interacts with law enforcement.
“Southwest is committed to providing a safe travel experience for all Customers and Employees. The airline adheres to applicable state and federal law when interacting with law enforcement agencies. Southwest has longstanding policies in place to ensure appropriate legal documentation is presented by law enforcement personnel before any information about Customers is shared,” the Southwest spokesperson told TheTravel.
The statement does not confirm whether the July 25 incident occurred or address what type of warrant the ICE agent presented. It does, however, reinforce Southwest’s position that law enforcement personnel must provide appropriate legal documentation before the airline shares customer information.
According to the WSJ, the Dallas confrontation may not have been an isolated event. An unnamed source said roughly a half-dozen similar incidents involving Southwest have occurred in recent weeks.
An administrative warrant and a judicial warrant are not the same thing. The former is issued within the immigration enforcement system, while a judicial warrant is signed by a judge.
The distinction could become increasingly important as airlines respond to more immigration enforcement activity at airports.
Several U.S. Airlines Decline Helping ICE With Airport Arrests
Southwest is not necessarily the only airline pushing back against ICE requests at airports. The Wall Street Journal also reported that an unnamed airline at a Southern airport recently declined to help ICE agents access a jet bridge so they could arrest a man traveling with his family. The airline reportedly refused to assist the agents. The man and his family ultimately did not board the flight, according to the report.
Other airport encounters have ended differently, with ICE agents successfully making arrests. Previous incidents happened in San Francisco, where a mother with a child was arrested by ICE at the airport, and in Las Vegas, where plain-clothes ICE agents attempted to arrest a passenger as concerned travelers watched.
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) later said ICE agents did not complete the Las Vegas airport arrest due to safety concerns. The department stated that officers “did not proceed with the arrest at the Las Vegas airport” because of “officer safety” concerns and instead arrested the passenger the following day after he departed from Los Angeles International Airport.
These encounters have raised questions about what airlines should do when federal immigration agents arrive at the gate or attempt to access an aircraft.
Airlines Seek Clearer Rules For ICE Arrests At Airports
The airline industry’s response suggests that Southwest’s experience is part of a broader concern over how ICE enforcement is being handled inside airports.
Airlines for America (A4A), a trade group representing major U.S. airlines, said its member companies have been communicating with ICE and TSA about procedures for immigration enforcement at airports.
A4A said its member companies “have had constructive discussions with ICE and TSA to ensure if law enforcement activity occurs at an airport, there are proper procedures and protocols in place to prioritize the safety and security of all involved.”
Airlines are not necessarily asking ICE to stop making arrests at airports. The bigger concern appears to be how those arrests are conducted and what access agents should have to airline-controlled areas and passenger information.
Issue Why Airlines Are Concerned Access to aircraft Employees may need to determine whether agents have appropriate documentation. Administrative warrants Airlines may question whether these documents provide sufficient authority for certain actions Passenger information Carriers have policies governing when customer information can be released Jet bridges and gates Arrests in crowded areas can create difficult situations for employees and travelers Safety Airline workers have to consider the safety of passengers and crew during enforcement activity A DHS spokesperson has defended the increase in airport enforcement. The spokesperson told NewsNation that the administration had reversed what it described as a previous policy allowing people who are in the country illegally to travel around the United States.
“DHS reversed the horrendous Biden-era policy that allowed aliens in our country illegally to jet around our country. Under President Trump, DHAS [DHS] will no longer tolerate this.”
The spokesperson added, “This administration is working diligently to ensure that aliens in our country illegally can no longer fly unless it is out of our country to self-deport.”
The statements highlight the competing concerns at the center of the issue. Federal officials say immigration laws must be enforced, while airlines are trying to determine how those enforcement actions should take place without creating additional safety and operational problems.
For travelers, the Southwest incident does not mean ICE agents are being barred from U.S. airports or that airlines will refuse to cooperate with immigration authorities. Instead, it shows that airlines may challenge access to aircraft or passenger information when they believe the proper legal documentation has not been provided.
As airport enforcement continues to increase, the question of where and how these arrests take place will likely remain a point of discussion between airlines, federal agencies and the public.
If you read the law it lets anyone claim to be offended by any media and that it doesn’t need to be declared obscene to be labeled obscene. Why is that? Because to a small group of very vocal haters just the existence of LGBTQ+ people is obscene. It offends their god so it offends them. But don’t try to claim the Bible is obscene or pushes offensive stuff it has special carve outs that make all the icky bad parts OK. I hope this will be appealed to the full appeals court as this attempt to errase an entire population of people based on bigotry must not be allowed to stand. I also just read where the education department under the hypermaga education secretary will not be enforcing or even recording the bullying and abuse of the LGBTQ+ kids at school. Her view is let the little fagots fend for themselves it seems. Remember she and her husband turned a blind eye to the many young boys being sexually assaulted by the wrestlers in their group.
Also the majority of the three judges panel said that the three patrons did not have standing to object because no books had been banned yet. They seem to have a wait and see if the victim is stabbed before taking the knife from the threatening person. That is stupid. Everyone knows what the law is intended to do and the writers of the law admit that openly. It seems the tRump appointed judges want to let attacks on the librarians and on the books that mention gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender, non-binary, and questioning kids / people be removed as soon as possible knowing it is harder to put them back than to ban them in the first place. Hugs.
Law creates penalties for librarians distributing content deemed ‘harmful’ to minors
I do not think the punishment fits the crime here. These people tried to stop other people from exercising their civil rights simply due to the bigotry and hate of the oppressors. Hate doesn’t give people the right to stop people from gathering or enjoying legal activities. These haters got away with it. That will simply encurage others to do the same thing over and over until they drive those they hate underground and out of the public view. Which is what these haters want to accomplish: remove those they hate from society. Hugs
https://archive.ph/zxplS#selection-1211.0-1211.118
The group behind the incident, NSC-131, will be permanently barred from ‘unlawful discriminatory practices’ in the state, if a judge approves
By Steven Porter Globe Staff,Updated July 31, 2026, 25 minutes agoIn this file photo, Christopher R. Hood Jr. appears at West Roxbury Municipal Court on July 25, 2022, when he was 23 years old. Hood founded the Nationalist Social Club 131 in 2019.Jessica Rinaldi/Globe Staff
The founder of a neo-Nazi group that sent masked men to protest outside a 2023 drag queen story hour event in Concord, N.H., has admitted their anti-LGBTQ intimidation tactics amounted to a civil rights violation, the New Hampshire attorney general’s office announced Thursday.Christopher R. Hood Jr. of Newburyport, Mass., and his group, the Nationalist Social Club-131, or NSC-131, will be permanently barred by court order from engaging in any further unlawful discriminatory practices, if a judge accepts the deal. Anyone who violates those terms could face further sanctions.Hood, 27, will be required to complete 250 hours of community service and pay $2,500 in civil penalties, plus another $7,500 if he violates the terms of the court’s order, according to a motion filed by prosecutors. He’ll also be barred from coming within 250 feet of the eatery where this occurred or any other Teatotaller Café location.The core allegation in this case was that Hood, his organization, and 19 unnamed co-defendants — who directed intimidating chants and homophobic slurs at those inside the establishment, performed Nazi salutes, and banged on the cafe’s glass windows — had sought to compel a place of public accommodation to engage in unlawful discrimination on the basis of sex, sexual orientation, or gender identity.“No individual or organization has the right to threaten, intimidate, or coerce a New Hampshire business into violating the law or denying lawful access based on protected characteristics,” Attorney General John M. Formella said in a statement.“This resolution delivers accountability and sends the message that organized hate group activity that violates the law will not be tolerated,” he added.The attorneys who represented the defendants in this case, Bradford Ryan Stanton and William E. Gens, didn’t respond to requests for comment.Formella said certain terms under the agreement apply to NSC-131 as an unincorporated association. For example, the group will be permanently barred from all unlawful discriminatory practices and will be prohibited from coming within 250 feet of any location that’s part of the Teatotaller Café business, which has since rebranded as Totally Tea and Coffee.That means an individual who didn’t participate in the 2023 incident could theoretically be subjected to the terms of this agreement in the future, if there is evidence of their affiliation with NSC-131, he said.The motion Formella’s office filed with the court indicates NSC-131 has disbanded and Hood has stated he intends to discontinue his involvement with that group and other organized hate activity.Formella told the Globe that securing a victory in which the defendant admitted wrongdoing represents a significant achievement.“It was worth it, I think, in the greater context of our civil rights efforts to get that admission,” he said.This wasn’t Formella’s first attempt to clamp down on NSC-131’s activity. His office filed a complaint in early 2023 alleging the group had committed civil rights violations by hanging a “Keep New England White” banner from a Portsmouth overpass in 2022. But the New Hampshire Supreme Court ultimately ruled in early 2025 that the prosecution was unconstitutional on free-speech grounds.Formella’s office filed the second case against Hood and NSC-131, regarding the Teatotaller incident, in late 2023.Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Joy Campbell also filed a complaint in late 2023 against Hood, NSC-131, and a group leader named Liam McNeil of Waltham, Mass., over incidents involving LGBTQ events and immigrants in emergency shelters. That case is still pending, according to court records.Hood was formerly part of Patriot Front and the Proud Boys before he founded NSC-131 in late 2019. The members of his group disrupted or shut down several drag queen story events in Massachusetts in 2022, according to the lawsuit. Members of the group regularly wore khaki pants, black shirts or jackets, and ski masks, balaclavas, and neck gaiters to hide their identities.——————————————————————————————————Steven Porter can be reached at steven.porter@globe.com. Follow him @reporterporter.
More hate and bigotry enacted against all the medical safety data available. Guess I am just not being understanding today because these laws are not only not needed but also very harmful. They cause a lot more problems than the pretended harm they claim to solve. It is the attempt to regulate and restrict sexual / gender standards into the laws. It just causes kids and people problems for no reason and promotes anger / bigotry against a small minority of people. Hugs
Faefyx Collington (They/Them)July 19, 2026, 11:00 am EDTThe United Kingdom’s Department of Education has published its updated guidance for “Keeping Children Safe in Education 2026” (KCSIE) and it will take effect on September 1. However, the guidance is likely to put trans and gender-non-conforming children at greater risk.
“We criticise numerous aspects of the guidance, especially as to how schools should approach requests related to ‘social transition,’” The Good Law Project wrote in a statement responding to the draft guidance earlier this year. “We also emphasise its failure to properly explain how schools should accommodate the needs of trans pupils in accessing various aspects of school life, such as toilets, changing facilities, and sports.”
Last year, the United Kingdom’s Supreme Court ruled that, for the purposes of the 2010 Equality Act, the legal definition of “woman” is based on “biological sex.” In the aftermath, the Equality and Human Rights Commission released temporary guidance on barring trans people from single-sex spaces. They’ve now released their finalized plan, which says that businesses and institutions should prevent trans people using a single-sex spaces, and that if they allow trans people to use them, they will no longer be considered single-sex spaces.
The aggressive new schools guidance set out in KCSIE is set to comply with the EHRC’s updated policies around single-sex spaces, ruling that trans and gender-questioning children cannot use spaces aligned with their gender identity, even if they have socially transitioned.
Never Miss a Beat
Subscribe to our newsletter to stay ahead of the latest LGBTQ+ political news and insights.
Email Email EmailFrequency
- Daily Brief
- Week in Review
- Week in Good News
———————————————————————————————————————–“Schools must not allow children into toilets designated for the opposite biological sex,” the guidance reads. “This includes where schools are responding to a request to support any degree of social transition for children who are questioning their gender.”
The same policy is applied to changing rooms for those over 11 years old, nor should the students “share overnight accommodation with a child of the opposite biological sex,” it states.
The guidance allows for single-use restrooms “if a gender-questioning child does not want to use the toilet designated for their biological sex.” However, there is no actual requirement for this, but only the suggestion that “schools and colleges should consider whether they can provide an alternative toilet facility—for example self-contained individual toilets—without compromising the provision of single-sex facilities.”
When it comes to all of these arrangements, the guidance clearly states, “These alternative arrangements should not compromise the safety, comfort, privacy or dignity of the child, or of any other children.”
However, such arrangements in their own right will challenge the safety and dignity of trans children. One plaintiff in a lawsuit challenging Idaho’s bathroom bill died by suicide earlier this year. Before her death she said of similar provisions, “It is scary having to look around before to see if anyone will see me going into the single-user restroom, as I worry about people gossiping and speculating about me being transgender.”
When it comes to social transition at school, the guidance advises against staff and teachers supporting it, citing concerns raised in the controversial Cass Review. The guidance sets out extensive hurdles before any member of staff at a school or colleges can be supportive of a social transition.
The guidance establishes that “parents and carers should be actively involved and their views treated with importance.” That rule alone amounts to a forced outing policy that could put trans children at risk of harm if their family are not supportive. While the guidance goes on to carve out an exception for “rare circumstances” where involving parents and carers could pose a “greater risk,” such a policy would require a lot of trust and a careful hand from school administrators who are inexperienced with such matters.
The possibility of the school deciding not to allow the social transition is not only laid out but encouraged. The guidance notes that “when considering a child’s request for support with social transition will be to consider what is in the best interests of the child and other children, and a decision relating to social transition may not be the same as a child’s wishes.” They also note that, for younger children, support for a social transition should be “agreed very rarely.”
More of the choice is taken away from trans children and their families with the note that for “pre-pubertal children” clinical involvement should be part of the decision-making process and that “should include advising on the risks and benefits of social transition as a planned intervention, referencing best available evidence. This is not a role that can be undertaken by staff without appropriate clinical training.”
Subscribe to the LGBTQ Nation newsletter and be the first to know about the latest headlines shaping LGBTQ+ communities worldwide.
This is what all the medical data and medical science shows which is why laws were passed to promote transgender acceptance. Then some people decided it was an insult to their god, some decided that they needed everyone to be the same as they are in life, and politicians realized it was a way to distract and get people to vote for them. There is no medical reason, no safety reason, and no social reason for hate towards trans people and other LGBTQ+. To be so dismissive of the needs of other people who cause you no harm is crazy and I do not understand the motivation of the bigots. Hugs
John Russell (He/Him)February 12, 2026, 3:30 pm EST· Updated on February 13, 2026The U.K. government appears to have covered up a dramatic rise in transgender youth suicides, according to data obtained by U.K.-based government accountability non-profit the Good Law Project.
As Erin in the Morning reports, data the non-profit obtained from the National Health Service (NHS)-funded National Child Mortality Database (NCMD) via a Freedom of Information request sharply contrasts with the government’s official report on trans youth suicides in the wake of the 2020 Bell v. Tavistock ruling.
As the Good Law Project notes, following the U.K. High Court of Justice’s initial ruling in Tavistock, which found that minors under 16 could not legally consent to receive puberty blockers for the treatment of gender dysphoria, the National Health Service (NHS) substantially limited access to gender-affirming care for minors. Those limits reportedly remained in place even after the Tavistock ruling was overturned in 2021.
The U.K. government commissioned its 2024 Appleby Report after the Good Law Project reported that two whistleblowers with the Tavistock gender clinic alerted the organization to a significant rise in suicides among young people on the NHS’s waitlist for appointments to begin gender-affirming care in the wake of the Tavistock case.
————————————————————————————————————————
Insights for the LGBTQ+ community
Subscribe to our briefing for insights into how politics impacts the LGBTQ+ community and more.
Frequency Email *Frequency
- Daily Brief
- Week in Review
- Week in Good News
——————————————————————————————————————–According to Good Law Project, the Appleby Report identified only 12 suicide deaths among current or former Gender Identity Development Service (GIDS) patients at the Tavistock clinic between 2018 and 2024. However, as Erin in the Morning notes, the report disregarded young people who were unable to access GIDS care due to long wait times, which, post-Tavistock, now last an average 25 years.
At the same time, Good Law Project submitted a Freedom of Information request with the NCMD, and has only just published the data it received.
“Good Law Project can confirm that in 2021–2022 suicides of trans children in England surged to 22, a marked increase from 5 and 4 the previous two years,” the organization wrote in a February 7 release. “This spike follows the decision by NHS England to pull down the shutters on gender-affirming healthcare for young trans people” following the Tavistock case.
In total, the NCMD data show 46 transgender children in the U.K. died by suicide between 2019 and 2025. In addition to the nine accounted for between 2019–2021 and the alarming spike to 22 between 2021–2022, the data also show 10 suicide deaths between 2022–2023. And, according to Good Law Project, NCMD added that “the numbers reported in more recent years will likely be underestimated, due to a higher proportion of child death reviews that have not yet been completed.”
Good Law Project said it was “appalled” that U.K. health secretary Wes Streeting “commissioned and published a report to reassure the public that there was no significant rise in suicide rates, when 22 children took their own lives in a single year: 2021-22.” The Appleby report, they said, “denied the reality of trans deaths, as Streeting’s ban on puberty blockers denied the reality of trans lives.”
The nonprofit claims that Streeting department “fought tooth and nail” to block its freedom of information requests.
“To silence those raising the alarm on rising trans suicides as ‘dangerous’ while ramping up the policies correlating with that rise is an act of grave moral wickedness,” the group said.
Trans journalist Erin Reed said of these findings, “More alarming is what appears to be an explicit attempt to cover up trans youth suicide deaths. Those who seek to restrict gender-affirming care also seek to restrict any information showing those restrictions may lead to harm. Among the far right, claims have emerged that transgender youth are in no danger of suicide from the withdrawal of gender-affirming care, but this could not be further from the truth.”
Editor’s note: If you or someone you know is struggling or in crisis, help is available. Call or text 988 or chat at 988lifeline.org. The Trans Lifeline (1-877-565-8860) is staffed by trans people and will not contact law enforcement. The Trevor Project provides a safe, judgement-free place to talk for youth via chat, text (678-678), or phone (1-866-488-7386). Help is available at all three resources in English and Spanish.
Subscribe to the LGBTQ Nation newsletter and be the first to know about the latest headlines shaping LGBTQ+ communities worldwide.
Again so much hate and anger towards people who do him no harm. A desire and a demand that he gets to rule how others live. Such self important Christian love. No hate like some Christians love for the right to tell others what God thinks. It is strange that their god always agrees with them, never that they need to change or grow, just that others must live by the church doctrines of the hater. Hate who they hate and the world is a paradise they believe. Notice the pastor is OK with a man penatrating and using his wife in any way he wants, anally or orally. Only sex between men in any form is to be illegal. It seems very selfish to me. Why is the act OK if he does it with his wife but I can’t do it with my husband Hugs
https://www.unclosetedmedia.com/p/hand-jobs-oral-sex-and-anal-pete
In his first interview with an LGBTQ publication, Pastor Doug Wilson reveals that as many as 20 people in the government align with his church’s ideology.