Working With Our States On Resources Still Available To US

There is a great deal of info here. It is important for we the people to know, though, because it helps us when we or others need these resources. -A

Medicaid Eligibility and Enrollment Rules Lay Framework for Program Improvements States Can Still Adopt, Despite Moratorium

September 24, 2025 | By Farah Erzouki

As part of historic cuts to Medicaid that will take health coverage away from millions, the Republican megabill enacted in July places a ten-year moratorium on implementing portions of two recently codified Medicaid eligibility and enrollment rules, effectively repealing them.^[1] While these provisions are no longer mandatory, many remain optional. States can and should still voluntarily implement these approaches to streamline eligibility and ensure as many eligible people as possible enroll in and retain Medicaid coverage.

Congress blocked parts of two rules that were adopted by the Biden Administration to make it easier for eligible enrollees — particularly seniors, people with disabilities, and children enrolled in the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) — to get and stay enrolled in Medicaid or CHIP. The first rule, finalized in 2023, addressed many barriers that eligible seniors experience when accessing Medicare Savings Programs (MSPs).^[2] The second rule, finalized in April 2024, codified many important policies that simplify the process for eligible people, including older adults and people with disabilities (the non-MAGI population), children, and pregnant people to get and stay enrolled in Medicaid and CHIP.^[3]States should continue implementing optional portions of the rules to increase efficiency and further improve and streamline their programs so that eligible people can more easily get and keep their coverage.

States still must comply with the portions of the eligibility and enrollment rules that had already taken effect before Congress enacted the ten-year moratorium, which mostly affects parts of the rules that had not yet gone into effect.^[4] The blocked provisions include amendments from the Centers on Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) to clarify and simplify long-standing regulatory provisions and mandates for states to follow newly created best practices. Even though some of these clarifications have been blocked, the underlying requirements remain intact, and states must follow them.

Importantly, though the blocked policies are no longer mandatory, they remain optional and are not in conflict with other regulations, except in a handful of cases. Because the blocked policies would have increased efficiency and improved and streamlined programs so that eligible people could more easily get and keep their coverage, states should proceed in implementing now-optional portions of the rules. In a few cases, blocked provisions are not allowed because of how existing regulations are written.

The two tables below outline the status of each provision in the final rules and whether it is still in place and required; blocked and now optional for states; clarifications are blocked but the underlying rules are still required; or blocked and no longer allowed.^[5] Additional discussion of these provisions follows the tables.

Snip-they paste in ginormously, so I’m leaving them there, and referring you to the page, linked in the headline. The original table is also linked just below.

Source: Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), “Streamlining Medicaid; Medicare Savings Program Eligibility Determination and Enrollment,” 88 Fed. Reg. 65230, September 21, 2023, https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2023-09-21/pdf/2023-20382.pdf.

Source: HHS, “Medicaid Program; Streamlining the Medicaid, Children’s Health Insurance Program, and Basic Health Program Application, Eligibility Determination, Enrollment, and Renewal Processes,” 89 Fed. Reg. 22780, April 2, 2024, https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2024-04-02/pdf/2024-06566.pdf.

States Should Continue Implementing Simplified Processes

Most states have already implemented parts of the rules that weren’t blocked, since those generally had effective dates that have already passed. Those provisions are still required, and states shouldn’t make any changes to those parts of their policies and systems.

As the tables above outline, the majority of the provisions that were blocked are no longer required, but they remain optional for states. Many states are likely in the process of implementing those provisions (or have already implemented them) and should continue moving forward with these changes that streamline eligibility for seniors, people with disabilities, and others.

Streamlining MSP Enrollment

The final rule includes a number of provisions for states to better facilitate and streamline MSP enrollment.^[6] MSPs, administered through state Medicaid programs, offer significant help with the costs of Medicare premiums and cost-sharing to older adults and people with disabilities who are dually eligible for Medicaid and Medicare.^[7] However, many more people are eligible for MSPs than are enrolled, and these provisions were aimed at increasing MSP enrollment among those eligible but not enrolled.

Provision Not Blocked, Remains Required

Automatic enrollment of certain Supplemental Security Income (SSI) recipients in the QMB eligibility group when they enroll in Medicaid (42 C.F.R. §435.909). People enrolled in Medicare who also receive SSI benefits are eligible for the QMB MSP group in addition to full Medicaid. However, many states require a separate application for QMB, which creates an additional layer of bureaucracy that deters eligible people from enrolling. This provision is aimed at removing this layer of bureaucracy and maximizing QMB enrollment.

The final rule requires 36 states and the District of Columbia, considered Part A “buy-in” states, to automatically enroll SSI recipients in the QMB eligibility group when they enroll in Medicaid. ^[8] The policy remains optional for 14 states that are referred to as “group payer” states, but these states should also strive to make enrollment for SSI recipients in QMB automatic.

Provision Blocked, Remains State Option

Aligning LIS and MSP family size definitions and income counting rules (42 C.F.R. §435.601(e)). CMS historically allowed states to apply their own definition of family size when determining household-based income limits for MSP eligibility. State MSP definitions that don’t align with LIS make it difficult for state agencies to expedite enrollment of LIS recipients into MSPs, since agencies often have to contact applicants for additional information if the definitions don’t align. The final rule required, and states can still implement, a definition of MSP family size to be “at least” those who are included in the LIS definition. States can also choose to align income counting rules for the programs to further streamline enrollment of LIS recipients into MSPs.
Accepting self-attestation for certain types of income and resources (42 C.F.R. §435.952(e)). Existing Medicaid regulations provide states the option to allow an MSP applicant’s self-attestation of all eligibility criteria except for citizenship and immigration status.^[9] The final rule required states to accept self-attestation of certain types of income and resources such as non-liquid resources and burial funds up to $1,500 for purposes of determining eligibility for MSPs. States should accept self-attestation for these types of income and resources to further streamline MSP enrollment and reduce paperwork and documentation requests.
Clarifying the effective date of QMB enrollment for certain individuals living in “group payer” states (42 C.F.R. §406.21(c)(5)). The QMB Program pays for Part A premiums and Part B premiums, deductibles, copayments, and coinsurance. QMB enrollment for those who live in “group payer” states is particularly challenging. When states use the group payer arrangement to pay Part A premiums, certain enrollment restrictions apply, such as only being able to apply for Medicare Part A during the Medicare General Enrollment Period (January 1-March 31 of each year) if applicants did not enroll during their Initial Enrollment Period. The Part A effective date was recently changed to be the first month after enrollment, and the final rule aligned the QMB effective date with the new Part A effective date for those living in group payer states. States can still align their effective dates to ensure that eligible people receive the financial assistance they need to participate in Part A.

Clarifying Provision Blocked, Underlying Regulation Remains Required

Using Low-Income Subsidy (LIS) data for MSP applications (42 C.F.R. §435.911(e)). Known as “Extra Help,” LIS helps pay prescription drug costs under Medicare Part D. LIS is federally administered by the Social Security Administration (SSA). Many people who enroll in LIS are eligible for MSPs, but state Medicaid agencies do not enroll them automatically.

The Medicare Improvements for Patients and Providers Act of 2008 (MIPPA) requires SSA to share data from LIS applications (‘‘leads data’’) with state Medicaid agencies and requires that, based on that data, agencies ‘‘shall initiate’’ an MSP application. However, not all states have done so. As a result, even though most of the over 14 million LIS enrollees are eligible for MSPs, over 1 million are not enrolled.^[10] Using LIS data for MSP enrollment would significantly reduce the paperwork burden that applicants often face when applying for MSPs and would eliminate verification requests for information that the state Medicaid agency could access using LIS or other data. While a provision clarifying this rule was blocked, states are still expected to use LIS leads data from SSA to initiate an MSP application based on the MIPPA provision.

Alignment of Non-MAGI Policies With MAGI Practices

The Affordable Care Act’s (ACA) simplified eligibility and enrollment processes for MAGI enrollees were not extended to non-MAGI enrollees, including seniors and people with disabilities. As a result, non-MAGI enrollees often need to take additional steps to enroll and stay enrolled in coverage. The final rule sought to build on the ACA streamlining rules by aligning the enrollment and renewal processes for non-MAGI enrollees with MAGI requirements. Despite the moratorium, states can still take important steps to streamline procedures for non-MAGI enrollees.

Provision Not Blocked, Remains Required

Apply primacy of electronic verification and reasonable compatibility standard for resources (42 C.F.R. §§435.940, 435.952). The final rule also added provisions to clarify the requirements at 435.952 and 435.940 for states to implement and utilize asset verification systems to more seamlessly electronically verify non-MAGI enrollee assets at application and renewal,^[11] and apply a reasonable compatibility standard for assets. Such a standard allows for self-attestation and information from data sources to be considered “reasonably compatible” if they are both below, at, or above the eligibility threshold, even if the amount of income in the attestation is different from the amount in the electronic data source.^[12] This was expected of states based on how the original regulations were written, but many states did not interpret it as such. Reasonable compatibility is commonly used for income verification but was not required for asset verification. Under this policy, the client attestation and data source are considered “reasonably compatible” if they are both below the eligibility threshold, reducing requests for additional information. This provision was not blocked, so states must continue to apply primacy of electronic verification and a reasonable compatibility standard for assets.

Provision Blocked, Remains State Option

States have always had the option of aligning their MAGI processes to non-MAGI enrollees and most states have already done so.^[13] Even though the reconciliation bill blocked provisions that would have made these options requirements, states that have not already adopted these options should still implement the streamlining practices, including:

Aligning the application and enrollment process with MAGI requirements (42 C.F.R. §435.907(d)). When requesting information from non-MAGI applicants, states should provide 15 days or more to respond and allow applicants to provide requested information through all modes of submission. States should also provide a 90-day reconsideration period if an application was denied for not providing the requested information, which allows for the requested information to be treated as a new application if submitted within 90 calendar days, rather than terminating an enrollee’s coverage and requiring them to submit a new application. States should also prohibit in-person interviews as part of the application process to reduce burden on non-MAGI applicants, many of whom may experience difficulties participating in an in-person interview due to mobility issues, lack of transportation, among other barriers.
Aligning the renewal process with MAGI requirements (42 C.F.R. §435.916). This includes renewing non-MAGI enrollees no more frequently than every 12 months, providing pre-populated renewal forms with a minimum of 30 days to respond, providing a 90-day reconsideration period^[14] if an enrollee’s coverage was terminated for not completing the renewal process, and prohibiting states from requiring an in-person interview as part of the renewal process.

Implementing these policies will reduce red tape and administrative burden, making the application and renewal processes more accessible for non-MAGI groups and reducing both agency and client burden.

Clarifying Provision Blocked, Underlying Regulation Remains Required

Allow non-MAGI applicants to provide applications and supplemental forms through all modes of submission allowed for MAGI applicants (42 CFR §435.907(c)(4)). Among the blocked policies was a provision that clarified an existing requirement (at 42 C.F.R. §435.907(c)) for states to accept applications and supplemental forms needed to complete an application from non-MAGI enrollees via all modalities (e.g., telephone, mail, online). Though the clarification was blocked, states still must accept applications and supplemental forms via all modalities as has been required, but not consistently applied, for non-MAGI groups.

CHIP Improvements

In addition to improvements for non-MAGI enrollees, the final rule also removed barriers to CHIP enrollment by prohibiting practices that were previously optional for states.^[15] These provisions went into effect last year and were not blocked through reconciliation.

Provision Not Blocked, Remains Required

No CHIP lockout periods when premiums are not paid (42 C.F.R. §457.570(c)).
No waiting periods to enroll after becoming uninsured (42 C.F.R. §§457.65(d), 457.805(b), 457.810(a)).
No lifetime or annual limits to receiving coverage (42 C.F.R. §457.480).
Improved transitions between Medicaid and CHIP (42 C.F.R. §§431.10, 435.1200(b)1, 435.1200(b)(3)(vi), 435.1200(b)(4), 435,1200(c), 435.1200(e)(1)(i), 435.1200(e)(4), 435.1200h(3), 457.348, 457.350), including:
- Requiring each program to also determine eligibility for the other program,
- Accepting eligibility determinations made by the other program,
- Transitioning applicants to the coverage they are or could be eligible for; and
- Providing a single, combined eligibility determination notice to all household members.

Eliminating Barriers to Coverage

In addition to the policy improvements that addressed challenges faced by older adults, people with disabilities, and children, the final rule also made changes that better streamline Medicaid enrollment and renewal processes for all applicants and enrollees. Some of the provisions remain in place and, as with other sections of the rules, states still have opportunities to adopt many of the policies that are affected by the bill’s moratorium on elements of the rule.

Provision Not Blocked, Remains Required

Stronger recordkeeping practices (42 C.F.R. §§431.17, 435.914(a), 435.914(b), 457.965). The final rule modernizes recordkeeping rules that had not been changed since 1986 and includes requirements such as maintaining records in an electronic format, specifying what information related to an enrollee’s application or renewal should be included in the file, maintaining records for a minimum of three years, and specifying how and when states should make the records available to outside agencies or parties authorized to review them.
No limit on the number of reasonable opportunity periods (42 C.F.R. §435.956(b)(4)). State agencies are required to provide a “reasonable opportunity period” of 90 days to provide satisfactory proof of citizenship or immigration status when the agency is unable to verify an individual’s attestation. The final rule restricts limitations on the number of reasonable opportunity periods that an applicant may be granted, giving people more opportunity to secure documents from agencies that can be slow to respond.^[16]
No requirement to apply for all other benefits (42 C.F.R. §§435.608, 436.608). Old rules required Medicaid applicants and enrollees to apply for income and resources (benefits) “available” to them such as pensions, retirement, and disability benefits as a condition of their eligibility (unless they could show good cause for not doing so). This rule imposed administrative burdens on individuals seeking health coverage and often delayed the application process. The final rule removes the regulation and redefines the income and resources “available” to applicants and enrollees as only those that are within their immediate control, effectively eliminating the requirement to apply for other benefits as a condition of eligibility.
Facilitate enrollment by allowing “medically needy” individuals to deduct prospective available medical expenses (42 C.F.R. §§435.831, 436.831). “Medically needy” individuals have incomes too high to be eligible for Medicaid but have medical costs so high that they are able to “spend down” to become income-eligible for Medicaid. Previously, medically needy individuals had to submit documentation of the expenses they incurred before their Medicaid coverage kicked in. In some cases, this led to people churning in and out of coverage depending on the timing of their medical costs and agency procedures to verify financial eligibility. The final rule lets state agencies project those medical expenses that are constant and predictable into the future, allowing enrollees with ongoing medical needs to remain enrolled without breaks in coverage.

Provision Blocked, Remains State Option

Improving Medicaid agency processes for updated address information (42 C.F.R. §§435.919, 457.344). The final rule sought to standardize a process for state agencies to update enrollee contact information, including specifying which data sources are considered reliable, what actions agencies should take when receiving address updates (or when returned mail has no forwarding address), and requiring agencies to make a “good-faith effort” to contact an enrollee to confirm updated address information through two or more modalities, such as via text and email. While this provision of the rule was blocked through the megabill, beginning on October 1, 2029, a separate section in the new legislation requires state agencies to collect updated address information from reliable data sources, including returned mail and managed care entities, and delegates authority to the Secretary of HHS to specify what actions states can take after receiving updated address information.^[17] While awaiting further guidance from CMS, state agencies should continue to implement the best practices the final rule sought to standardize around obtaining updated address information and contacting enrollees to resolve discrepancies.
Establishing specific requirements for acting on changes in circumstances (42 C.F.R. §§435.919, 457.344, 457.960). Enrollees are required to report changes in circumstances that could impact their eligibility during their eligibility period, and state agencies are required to act on such reports or on data they receive that indicate a change that could impact eligibility. The final rule outlined procedures for state agencies regarding changes in circumstance, such as communicating to enrollees the process for reporting changes, and actions the agency must take when they receive information about an enrollee’s change in circumstance. The rule also applied the same timeliness standards for enrollees to respond when changes are either reported by them or if the state receives data indicating a change. These include providing enrollees 30 days to submit requested information and providing enrollees a 90-day reconsideration period so the enrollee does not have to fully reapply. Though this provision was blocked, states can still implement these best practices to better streamline the process for addressing either enrollee-provided information that could affect eligibility or information received from a third party (such as through a data match).
Ensuring reasonable timeframes for determinations and redeterminations at application, renewal, and following changes in circumstance (42 C.F.R. §§435.907(d), 435.912, 457.1170). The final rule established more specific timeliness requirements for states to adhere to when processing renewals and changes in circumstance. The rule also required states to provide a minimum number of days for individuals to return requested information and documentation to their state agency — 15 days for information requested at application and 30 days for information requested during a renewal or for a change in circumstance. Though this provision was blocked, state Medicaid agencies can use the timeframes laid out in the rule for their application and renewal processes, and notably, they still cannot terminate coverage for individuals who have returned their information until their renewal is fully processed.^[18]

Provision Blocked, No Longer Allowed

Simplifies verification of citizenship and identity (42 C.F.R. §435.407). Currently, states are required to verify citizenship and identity first through SSA data, and if unsuccessful, through alternative methods such as state vital statistics records or through the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements (SAVE) program. When these systems are used to verify citizenship, individuals must also provide proof of identity. This provision would have considered verification of birth with a state vital statistics agency or verification of citizenship with DHS SAVE as stand-alone evidence of citizenship (similar to SSA data) without needing to provide additional proof of identity. Due to the moratorium, states will still have to request verification of identity when using these sources to verify citizenship.

Health, Medicaid and CHIP

PDF of this report (17 pp.)

Policy Basics
Health

End Notes

^[1] Because the bill placed a moratorium on implementation of the rules, the Code of Federal Regulations may still show new provisions added by the two rules, even though they are not currently in effect. Throughout this paper, we refer to the provisions that are temporarily blocked by the moratoria provisions in sections 71101 and 71102 of P.L. 119-21 as “blocked” provisions.

^[2] Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), “Streamlining Medicaid; Medicare Savings Program Eligibility Determination and Enrollment,” 88 Fed. Reg. 65230, September 21, 2023, https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2023-09-21/pdf/2023-20382.pdf.

^[3] HHS, “Medicaid Program; Streamlining the Medicaid, Children’s Health Insurance Program, and Basic Health Program Application, Eligibility Determination, Enrollment, and Renewal Processes,” 89 Fed. Reg. 22780, April 2, 2024, https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2024-04-02/pdf/2024-06566.pdf.

^[4] While the House bill initially blocked the entire rule with minimal exceptions, the Senate Parliamentarian ruled that additional provisions could not be blocked, presumably because they were already in effect.

^[5] A number of provisions in the final rules included miscellaneous changes that did not change policy, such as changing references, definitions or language used to describe something, removing headings, and removing and redesignating sections. Such sections include 42 C.F.R. §§ 431.213(d), 431.231(d), 435.4, 435.222, and 435.911(a).

^[6] Farah Erzouki, “Federal Rule on Medicare Savings Programs Will Cut Red Tape for Older Adults and People With Disabilities,” CBPP, May 3, 2024, https://www.cbpp.org/research/health/federal-rule-on-medicare-savings-programs-will-cut-red-tape-for-older-adults-and.

^[7] Some individuals who are eligible for both Medicaid and Medicare receive full Medicaid benefits along with Medicare and may also receive assistance through MSPs. Partial dual eligibles are enrolled in Medicare and receive assistance from MSPs to help afford that coverage. Medicaid and CHIP Payment and Access Commission (MACPAC), Medicare Savings Programs, https://www.macpac.gov/subtopic/medicare-savings-programs/.

^[8] All states must pay the Part A premium for QMB enrollees who do not receive premium-free Part A; “buy-in” states include the Part A premium cost for QMBs in their existing buy-in agreement, which helps facilitate automatic enrollment in QMB any time of the year. When states use the group payer arrangement to pay Part A premiums, certain enrollment restrictions apply, such as only being able to apply for Medicare Part A during the Medicare General Enrollment Period (January 1-March 31 of each year) if they did not enroll during their Initial Enrollment Period (three months before turning 65 and three months after the month the individual turns 65, lasting seven months total). CMS, “Program Overview and Policy: Chapter 1,” https://www.cms.gov/files/document/chapter-1-program-overview-and-policy.pdf.

^[9] 42 CFR § 435.945(a).

^[10] KFF, “Number of Low-Income Subsidy (LIS) Enrollees,” https://www.kff.org/medicare/state-indicator/number-of-low-income-subsidy-lis-enrollees/?currentTimeframe=0&sortModel=%7B%22colId%22:%22Location%22,%22sort%22:%22asc%22%7D; HHS.

^[11] Farah Erzouki and Jennifer Wagner, “Using Asset Verification Systems to Streamline Medicaid Determinations,” CBPP, June 23, 2021, https://www.cbpp.org/research/health/using-asset-verification-systems-to-streamline-medicaid-determinations.

^[12] Jennifer Wagner, “Reasonable Compatibility Policy Presents an Opportunity to Streamline Medicaid Determinations,” CBPP, August 16, 2016, https://www.cbpp.org/research/reasonable-compatibility-policy-presents-an-opportunity-to-streamline-medicaid.

^[13] Alice Burns et al., “Medicaid Eligibility and Enrollment Policies for Seniors and People with Disabilities (Non-MAGI) During the Unwinding”, KFF, June 20, 2024, https://www.kff.org/report-section/medicaid-eligibility-and-enrollment-policies-for-seniors-and-people-with-disabilities-non-magi-during-the-unwinding-appendix/.

^[14] Section 435.919(d): “If an individual terminated for not returning requested information in accordance with this section subsequently submits the information within 90 calendar days after the date of termination, or a longer period elected by the State, the agency must reconsider the individual’s eligibility without requiring a new application.”

^[15] Tricia Brooks and Allexa Gardner, “Medicaid Eligibility and Enrollment Rule Explainer,” Georgetown Center for Children and Families, April 11, 2024, https://ccf.georgetown.edu/2024/04/11/medicaid-eligibility-and-enrollment-rule-explainer/.

^[16] When people enroll in Medicaid they are asked under penalty of perjury if they are a citizen, and for those who aren’t, if they have an eligible immigration status. In both cases the application asks applicants to provide relevant government-issued document numbers. These numbers along with other information about the applicant is shared through electronic data exchanges with either the Social Security Administration (SSA) in the case of a citizenship attestation or the Department of Homeland Security’s Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements (SAVE) in the case of people with eligible immigration status and citizens who completed the naturalization process. Many people can have their status verified easily and quickly through this process, but some cannot. For example, SSA can’t always substantiate citizenship of people born abroad if their Social Security number (SSN) was issued prior to the late 1970s, before SSA began verifying citizenship status when issuing SSNs. Because it can take time for agencies to notify the applicant that more information is needed, for the applicant to find and send documents, and for the agency to take steps to process documents, multiple reasonable opportunity periods are sometimes necessary.

^[17] Section 71103 of P.L. 119-21.

^[18] 42 C.F.R. § 435.912(g)(2), 42 C.F.R. § 435.930(b).

Another Comment Regarding Autism

“Autism is not a disease to be cured, autism is normal.” Abhijit Naskar, Palace of Grace

From Barry:

Fever, Fear, and False Frames: A Civic Response to the White House’s Autism Claims

I would only add that POTUS’s claims are an attack on pregnant people, too. Pregnancy is a complicated and physically painful condition to undergo, and that’s prior to labor which is different (and shorter, even when long.) Barry’s points about continuing to misrepresent and marginalize autistic people are well made and well taken. Pregnancy, as well, should not be misrepresented as something other than a serious medical condition.

Israel: A Society In Denial

This is incredibly disgusting and horrific. The Israeli media is pushing garbage, lies, and misinformation on the Israeli public. They don’t believe what other news sources say about starving children or women. One Israeli man said he was going into the military in two months and hoped to be sent to Gaza to kill the Palestinians. When asked about the women and children he claimed there were no innocents, that they were all Hamas. He was asked about kids, little kids and babies his answer were they were either Hamas or terrorists or future terrorists. Better to kill the babies now rather than them growing up to hurt an Israeli. Only one couple called for an end to the war. The others demand Hamas release the hostages. The surrounding crowd did not believe them when they said that Hamas was willing to return the hostages in exchange for stopping the war but Netanyahu killed the negotiations. They are as brained washed as Fox viewers and when the truth comes out they will be living in Palestinian land claiming innocence because they willfully did not know of what the military was doing. Oh well water under the bridge they will claim. I am seriously anti-Israel’s government and military. I think they are equal to Hitlers government and supporters. They need to suffer the same fate. Following orders doesn’t cut it. Being Jewish is not a pass for committing genocide. Never again is for all people or it is not for any people. Best wishes for all and hugs for those that want them.

IHIP News: Trump’s ATTACK on Free Speech BACKFIRES; MAGA Men Crash Grindr AGAIN?!

Jimmy Kimmel has been returned to air after Trump’s attacks on free speech, and the men of MAGA crash Grindr in Arizona during the Charlie Kirk memorial.

IHIP News: Trump COLLAPSES During SLURRED Speech as Polls NOSE DIVE!!

I Learn More From “Them” Every Time I Take a Little Time To Browse There-

Leslie Feinberg Changed Transmasc History. Here Are 7 of Hir Quotes to Live By

From Stone Butch Blues to Drag King Dreams, Feinberg left a lasting imprint on the trans liberation movement.

By Quispe López August 29, 2025

“Remember me as a revolutionary communist” were beloved author, labor organizer, and trans liberation fighter Leslie Feinberg’s final words on November 15, 2014.

Best known for hir seminal 1993 novel Stone Butch Blues, Leslie Feinberg forever changed the way we thought about transgender life in the United States. In the semi-autobiographical work, readers follow Jess Goldberg, a working class Jewish butch lesbian, as they navigate the hardships of being gender-nonconforming in a transphobic world, transition, passing, and trying to find queer community through it all. It is a novel so attuned to transmasculine experience that Stone Butch Blues to this day remains a shorthand and point of connection for many trans men, nonbinary people, and trans lesbians broadly.

That’s because Feinberg saw writing as a tool to break down the rigidity of previous understandings of transition. Instead, zie pushed for an expansive view of the term “transgender” — one that left space for the “gender outlaws” of the world who have existed beyond binary Western conceptions of gender since the beginning of time.

To say Feinberg permanently altered the fabric of the trans liberation movement would be an understatement. But to understand hir legacy and work, you need to know who zie was in life. Born September 1, 1949 and raised in Buffalo, New York, Feinberg grew up in a working-class Jewish family and was employed in factories at a young age. It’s through hir labor organizing alongside other butch lesbians and transmasculine people of the time that Feinberg became connected to broader liberation movements like Palestinian solidarity, the anti-racist movement, and transgender rights.

Feinberg’s work underscored the complexity of gender for many trans people, and zie didn’t shy away from trying to get cis people to understand. Following the breakout success of Stone Butch Blues, Feinberg went on to be one of the most visible trans organizers of the 1990s, appearing on popular television programs like The Joan Rivers Show to speak about realities of trans life. Zie went on to write several books on trans life and liberation, such as Drag King Dreams, Transgender Warriors: Making History From Joan of Arc to Dennis Rodman, and Trans Liberation: Beyond Pink or Blue. As a proud member of the Workers of the World Party, Feinberg emphasized how our struggles for freedom — whether it be gender, race, or class — are all intrinsically linked. Hir legacy insists that in order to free ourselves, we must understand that we are all fighting forms of injustice attached to the same chimera of oppression.

As we celebrate Feinberg’s birthday and Labor Day on September 1, it is a natural time to reflect on hir legacy, work, and contributions to trans people’s collective liberation. Below, we’ve compiled a non-comprehensive list of salient quotes from speeches, books, and articles Feinberg crafted during hir life.

“If you don’t name an oppression, you can’t fight it, you can’t organize around it. We want our own voices to be heard.” — The Joan Rivers Show

A 1993 episode of The Joan Rivers Show about trans people featured Leslie Feinberg alongside famed playwright Kate Bornstein and actor David Harrison. Rivers interviewed each of her guests on their experiences with gender, often asking invasive questions about “the surgery” and what people put down on forms and identity documents. But Feinberg took it as the ultimate opportunity to humanize trans people on national television, cutting through the sensationalizing to share the realities of life outside the Western gender binary. Feinberg even went so far as to point out the existence of gender variant people in cultures all over the world prior to colonization, such as Two-Spirit people — a radical thought for the daytime television audience of the 1990s.

“Understanding the amount of persecution and harassment we have in this society is gonna strengthen the fights from affirmative action to pay equity for all of us,” zie said.

Even when Rivers facetiously dug in with questions about why Feinberg didn’t conform to one gender or another, zie flipped the question and asked why the system existed at all. Rather than spouting off theory, Feinberg made the contradiction tangible by speaking on hir own lived experiences as a nonbinary butch. The whole episode is worth viewing in full.

“But very quickly I discovered that passing didn’t just mean slipping below the surface, it meant being buried alive.” — Stone Butch Blues

Feinberg’s seminal novel wasn’t just a reflection on being a trans in a transphobic society; the semi-biographical work offered a nuanced portrayal of the intersection of butch identity and nonbinary transness. Jess Goldberg, Stone Butch Blues’ protagonist, is forced to pass as a man for safety due to the dangers of being an openly gender non-conforming person in the 1950s and ’60s. But Jess is left feeling entirely isolated . A departure from the “born in the wrong body” narrative of transness, Feinberg instead paints a picture of being forced into a box for safety — and the subsequent loss of community that going stealth can present.

“I was still me on the inside, trapped in there with all my wounds and fears. But I was no longer me on the outside,” Jess reflects in the novel.

“I’m not saying we’ll live to see some sort of paradise. But just fighting for change makes you stronger. Not hoping for anything will kill you for sure.” — Stone Butch Blues

While Stone Butch Blues grapples with heavy themes like the loss of community, transphobia, and social isolation, it ends on a note of hope for our protagonist. In addition to highlighting the harsh realities of being trans, Feinberg always stood steadfast in our need to find strength in each other in the face of it. At the nadir of their isolation after moving to New York City, Jess meets Ruth, a trans woman who reminds them that the only way to survive in the face of transphobia is to rely on each other.

“As I look at them, each one, they are so beautiful and so strong they seem larger than life to me. But they’re not. They are real people. Flawed, like me. No heroic proportions. Just human.” — Drag King Dreams

Another work of fiction, Feinberg’s 2006 political novel Drag King Dreams follows Max Rabinowitz, a trans man who is suddenly catapulted back into social justice spaces by a tragedy after losing his joy for organizing.

The novel often invokes real-life trans figures such as Marsha P. Johnson to shore up its core thesis that all of our struggles for liberation are delicately interconnected. We might all be flawed, and it can be hard to work together at times, but when it counts, we need to put aside our differences and fight. At the culmination of the novel, Max realizes that you don’t need to be perfect to be a good comrade and make a difference.

“Maybe this is what legends are made of — real lives lifted up in retrospect to mythic proportions,” Feinberg writes.

“One banner particularly haunted me: it read ‘Stop the War Against Black America,’ which made me realize it wasn’t just distant wars that needed opposing.” — Transgender Warriors: Making History From Joan of Arc to Dennis Rodman

Feinberg always emphasized the interconnected nature of all forms of oppression in hir work. Zie underwood that, rather than fighting in individual silos, it’s imperative to understand the ways that suppressive societal forces work in tandem. In hir 1996 historical reflection on transness, Transgender Warriors: Making History From Joan of Arc to Dennis Rodman, Feinberg speaks about an experience they had at a protest for Palestinian liberation that opened their eyes to the symbiotic relationship between white supremacy, colonialism both abroad and domestically, and trans liberation.

“When our lives are suppressed, everyone is denied an understanding of the rich diversity of sex and gender expression and experience that exist in human society.” — Transgender Warriors: Making History From Joan of Arc to Dennis Rodman

By outlining the history of gender variance all over the world, Feinberg reminds readers that trans people are nothing new; we have always been here. Often, we were even revered.

“We have not always been forced to pass, to go underground, in order to work and live. We have a right to live openly and proudly,” Feinberg writes.

“No one’s sex reassignment or fluidity of gender threatens your right to self-identify and self-expression. On the contrary, our struggle bolsters your right to your identity. My right to be me is tied with a thousand threads to your right to be you.” — Trans Liberation: Beyond Pink or Blue

In this collection of speeches published in 1998, Feinberg reminds us that trans liberation has always been connected to the fight for cisgender gay, lesbian, and bisexual rights. Historically, and even to date, trans people have faced pushback from some cisgender people in the community who believe that the fight for trans rights will invalidate their own struggles. A constant advocate for solidarity between movements, Feinberg always asserted that without trans rights, there would be no gay rights.

Good Info Here-Care To Prepare

Every Recent Move That’s Been Made in the New Fight to Overturn Gay Marriage

The Supreme Court is expected to decide this fall whether they will formally take up a case that is asking them to reverse their decision in Obergefell v. Hodges.

By Nico DiAlesandro and Hope Pisoni, Uncloseted Media September 19, 2025

In the U.S. today, there are over 800,000 married gay couples. And 67% of Americans say they support marriage equality, including 50% of Republicans.

Despite this, many of the groups that fought to prevent the Obergefell ruling are now ramping up their ongoing fight to overturn it.

If Obergefell were overturned, it could become illegal for gay couples to marry in the 32 states that still have bans on the books. As the Supreme Court mulls over whether or not to take a case asking them to overturn the historic ruling, we’ve documented every step that has been taken in the past five years to threaten gay marriage in the U.S.

Oct. 5, 2020

The Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) rejects a petition to hear former Kentucky County Clerk Kim Davis’ appeal in Ermold v. Davis, a case brought by a same-sex couple after Davis denied them a marriage license in 2015. Justice Clarence Thomas, joined by Justice Samuel Alito, writes that the Obergefell ruling has “ruinous consequences for religious liberty” and that it “enables courts and governments to brand religious adherents who believe that marriage is between one man and one woman as bigots.” They express their desire to see Obergefell overturned, writing that SCOTUS “has created a problem that only it can fix.”

The following day, Liberty Counsel, a Christian legal group and Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC)-designated hate group, announces their intent to file a petition with the Supreme Court to “address Obergefell” after Davis’ case moves to a trial court.

Nov. 5, 2020

Nevada overturns an 18-year-old ban on same-sex marriage, making it the first state to enshrine gay couples’ right to marry in their constitution. Nevadans vote 62% in favor of the reversal.

“It feels good that we let the voters decide,” Equality Nevada President Chris Davin told NBC News. “The people said this, not judges or lawmakers. This was direct democracy—it’s how everything should be,” he said, adding that the LGBTQ community wants something concrete to protect same-sex marriage in case “the federal level ever revokes it—which is what a lot of folks are worried about with the new Supreme Court.”

June 17, 2021

SCOTUS rules in favor of Catholic Social Services (CSS), which sued the city of Philadelphia for ending its foster-care placement contract with CSS because of their refusal to certify same-sex couples as foster parents. The ruling, which states that Philadelphia’s termination of CSS’s contract violates the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment, provides a carve-out to Obergefell.

June 24, 2022

Roe v. Wade is overturned. In a concurring opinion with the majority, Thomas sets his eyes on Obergefell and Lawrence v. Texas—a ruling that in essence legalized gay sex. He writes that the Court should reconsider those cases since they used similar arguments to Roe v. Wade.

“[W]e should reconsider all of this Court’s substantive due process precedents, including Griswold, Lawrence, and Obergefell. Because any substantive due process decision is ‘demonstrably erroneous.’”

Despite Thomas’ opinion, the majority explicitly states that “[n]othing in this opinion should be understood to cast doubt on precedents that do not concern abortion.”

Dec. 13, 2022

President Joe Biden signs the Respect For Marriage Act into law. This solidifies federal and interstate recognition of same-sex marriages even if Obergefell is overturned. The law is a backstop to the attacks on same-sex marriage.

Dec. 19, 2022

In a response to the passage of the Respect for Marriage Act, SPLC-designated anti-LGBTQ hate group Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) says that “the chances of the Supreme Court overturning Obergefell are (unfortunately) slim to none.”

June 30, 2023

SCOTUS rules 6-3 that Colorado cannot force a website designer, who is represented by ADF, to create wedding websites for same-sex couples. The Court says doing so would violate the designer’s First Amendment right to free speech because her work is considered creative expression. This decision narrows how public-accommodation laws apply and creates another carve-out for Obergefell to be overturned.

Sept. 13, 2023

After a court ruling holds Kim Davis liable for damages to gay couples who she refused to sign marriage licenses for, Liberty Counsel discusses the potential to appeal the case up to the Supreme Court and use it to argue for Obergefell to be overturned.

July 8, 2024

The GOP’s national party platform, Make America Great Again!, drops explicit anti-Obergefell language from its plank. Despite this, the fight to overturn same-sex marriage continues to heat up.

Jan. 22, 2025

Tennessee lawmakers introduce a bill that would allow for “covenant marriages,” an explicitly religious form of marriage license that can only be given to a man and a woman and does not allow for divorce in most circumstances. Covenant marriages already exist in Arizona, Arkansas and Louisiana. Oklahoma, Texas and Missouri have recently introduced similar bills.

Jan. 27, 2025

Idaho’s House of Representatives passes a resolution calling on the Supreme Court to overturn Obergefell. The resolution was drafted by MassResistance, a far right group that wrote a book called “The Health Hazards of Homosexuality” and that has 24 chapters around the world. One of their newest chapters is in Kenya, where the group says it holds trainings for youth to “resist the LGBT agenda” in schools.

The Idaho resolution would go on to create a domino effect. Lawmakers in Michigan, Montana, North Dakota and South Dakota introduce similar measures in their states asking SCOTUS to overturn Obergefell.

Republican Rep. Josh Schriver, who introduced the resolution in Michigan, had previously posted to X: “Make gay marriage illegal again. This is not remotely controversial, nor extreme.”

June 10, 2025

At the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC), a national meeting of more than 10,000 church representatives from America’s largest Protestant denomination, the convention’s resolutions committee introduces a resolution calling on lawmakers and SCOTUS to overturn laws and court rulings, “including Obergefell v. Hodges, that defy God’s design for marriage and family.”

SBC delegates overwhelmingly vote in favor of a gay marriage ban as well as the reversal of Obergefell.

June 12, 2025

Liberty Counsel releases a statement titled “Obergefell ‘Marriage’ Opinion Must Be Overturned.” The group’s founder and chairman, Mathew Staver, says:

“The U.S. Constitution provides no foundation for ‘same-sex marriage.’ Obergefell was wrongly decided whereby the Court created a right that is nowhere to be found in the text. We will petition the U.S. Supreme Court because Kim Davis’ case underscores why the High Court should overturn Obergefell v. Hodges. Obergefell threatens the religious liberty of Americans who believe that marriage is a sacred union between one man and one woman.”

June 23, 2025

ADF publishes an article titled “Despite 10 Years of Obergefell, Kids Still Need a Mother and Father.” The article outwardly condemns gay marriage as bad for children, marking the group’s most explicit statement of opposition to the ruling in years. Weeks later, the group’s vice president of appellate advocacy publishes an essay arguing a similar premise.

July 24, 2025

Kim Davis files a petition asking SCOTUS to revisit and overturn Obergefell, saying the case was wrongfully decided. The petition will need just four votes from the justices to be heard by the Court.

Aug. 15, 2025

On a podcast, Hillary Clinton expresses her concern that Obergefell will be overturned:

“American voters, and to some extent the American media, don’t understand how many years the Republicans have been working in order to get us to this point. … It took 50 years to overturn Roe v. Wade. … The Supreme Court will hear a case about gay marriage; my prediction is they will do to gay marriage what they did to abortion—they will send it back to the states. … Anybody in a committed relationship out there in the LGBTQ community, you ought to consider getting married because I don’t think they’ll undo existing marriages, but I fear they will undo the national right.”

Sept. 7, 2025

In an interview with CBS News, conservative Justice Amy Coney Barrett argues SCOTUS rulings should not be based on “opinion polls” and that the Court should not be imposing its own values on the American people.

Fall 2025

In fall 2025, SCOTUS is expected to decide whether or not it will revisit Obergefell. If it grants a review, oral arguments will likely be heard in spring 2026 with a decision by late June 2026, during Pride Month.

Two more clips from The Majority Report. One on RFK destroying the CDC and the other on the how bad Chuck Schumer is as an opposition party leader.

Good News! Get On The Phone-

Bipartisan bill seeks to reinstate national suicide hotline for LGBTQ+ youth

Sep 17, 2025

Orion Rummler

This story was originally reported by Orion Rummler of The 19th. Meet Orion and read more of his reporting on gender, politics and policy.

If you or a loved one are in crisis, please call or text 988 or text HOME to 741741 to connect with a live volunteer crisis counselor.

Sens. Tammy Baldwin, a Democrat, and Lisa Murkowski, a Republican, introduced a bipartisan bill on Wednesday to re-establish national emergency suicide prevention services for LGBTQ+ youth — which have been stripped by the Trump administration at a time when the vulnerable group needs it most.

In July, the Trump administration terminated the 988 hotline’s LGBTQ+ services, which connected young people in crisis with counselors trained in supporting LGBTQ+ youth. This new bill, backed by the LGBTQ+ youth suicide prevention organization Trevor Project as well as the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention, would modify the Public Health Service Act to reinstate those services and require the Secretary of Health and Human Services to maintain them. The bill now moves to committee.

The Trevor Project estimates that more than 1.8 million LGBTQ+ young people seriously consider suicide each year in the United States, as they face high rates of bullying, assault and discrimination. And when the 2024 presidential race was called for Donald Trump, calls and texts to the Trevor Project’s own crisis hotlines spiked by 700 percent, as LGBTQ+ youth felt afraid about the outcome of the election.

“Given that LGBTQ+ youth are more than four times as likely to attempt suicide than their peers, the need for these services remains pressing,” said Jaymes Black, CEO of The Trevor Project, in a statement. “This is not about politics, or identity; this is about doing what is best to support our country’s highest risk populations — and save young people’s lives nationwide.”

During his first term in 2020, President Trump signed a bipartisan law to create 988 as a more accessible resource for mental health emergencies. The free hotline launched in July 2022. Since then, millions of people in crisis have turned to 988. And nearly 1.5 million of those calls, texts and chats were sent by young Americans seeking specialized LGBTQ+ services.

“We are in the middle of a mental health crisis, and the 988 lifeline saves lives, plain and simple,” said Baldwin, who wrote the original legislation to create the 988 hotline. Cutting funds for specialized services within 988 puts the lifeline in jeopardy, she said in a statement.

“There is absolutely no good reason that Donald Trump took away this specialized help for our LGBTQ youth. Mental health does not see partisan lines or geography,” the Wisconsin Democrat added.