The Trump administration has taken decisive action to ensure American tax dollars stop funding gender ideology programs abroad, expanding the long-standing Mexico City Policy in a move that affects more than $30 billion in foreign health assistance.
This is not small potatoes, folks. We are talking about real money going to real programs that have strayed far from their humanitarian missions.
The new policy, officially titled Promoting Human Flourishing in Foreign Assistance, builds upon existing restrictions that prevented U.S. foreign aid from supporting abortion services. Now, organizations promoting gender transition procedures or denying biological sex distinctions will find themselves cut off from American funding.
The Department of State made its position crystal clear in the policy language: “The Department does not believe taxpayer dollars should support sex-rejecting procedures, directly or indirectly for individuals of any age.” The statement continues by affirming that a person’s body operates according to biological functions, which are either healthy or unhealthy based on whether they align with natural human development.
The scope of what American taxpayers have been funding should raise eyebrows across the political spectrum. Under the previous administration, the U.S. Agency for International Development funded three transgender clinics in India. Another USAID grant issued $15 million for condoms destined for the Taliban. Perhaps most eyebrow-raising of all, $47,020 went to fund a transgender opera in Colombia.
Let that sink in for a moment. While Americans struggle with inflation and economic uncertainty, their tax dollars funded theatrical productions promoting gender ideology in South America.
The Biden administration had gone so far as to make LGBTQI+ advocacy a stated foreign policy priority, directing the State Department to track and report all funding supporting these initiatives. That transparency, ironically, now provides a roadmap showing exactly where the money has been flowing. The records reveal more than $3 million in small grants distributed to 116 organizations across 73 countries, with over $7 million supporting activities at USAID outposts worldwide.
Non-governmental organizations have long occupied a crucial space in international humanitarian work. From disaster relief to healthcare delivery in impoverished regions, these groups perform vital functions. But somewhere along the way, many strayed from their core missions and became vehicles for ideological activism.
Under Secretary of State Marco Rubio’s leadership, the department has drawn a line. Organizations receiving American funding must now affirm the reality of two distinct biological sexes and organize single-sex spaces accordingly when appropriate.
The reaction from advocacy groups has been swift and predictable. Representatives from organizations like the Council for Global Equality have accused the administration of weaponizing foreign assistance to promote an ideological agenda.
But here is where the argument falls apart. Recognizing biological reality is not ideological. It is fundamental truth. The transgender movement has advanced so rapidly through our institutions that it seems to have forgotten how radical its central claim actually is: that men can become women through declaration or medical intervention.
Standing firm on biological facts should not be controversial. What should raise concerns is how billions of taxpayer dollars have been funneled to organizations that treat observable reality as optional.
The Trump administration has consistently prioritized American interests in its foreign policy decisions. This latest action reflects that commitment while also addressing a more fundamental question: Should American citizens be forced to fund the promotion of ideas overseas that contradict basic biology and, in many cases, are restricted within our own borders?
The answer from this White House is a resounding no. Whether one views this as common sense governance or a necessary correction to years of ideological overreach, the practical effect remains the same. Organizations receiving American foreign aid dollars will need to choose between their advocacy missions and their funding sources.
That seems like a choice they should have been making all along.
Related: Federal Immigration Attorney Removed After Courtroom Outburst Over Caseload
