A mother-of-nine who proudly displayed a Pride flag outside her California store. A gay man who danced to a Beyoncé song in Brooklyn. Five patrons killed in a mass shooting at an LGBTQ+ nightclub in Colorado. All were appalling attacks against the LGBTQ+ community and their allies in recent months. From the disruption of drag show story hours to threats against retail employees for selling Pride merchandise, the rising threat of violence is terrifying, but unfortunately unsurprising, Sarah Moore, an Anti-LGBTQ+ Extremism Analyst, told The Independent. The senseless murder of Laura “Lauri” Ann Carleton last week is the most recent example of the anti-LGBTQ+ hate currently being spread across the US. The 66-year-old store owner was a straight, white woman who spent her time helping and advocating for everyone in the community, a Lake Arrowhead LGBTQ organisation said in a post. Carleton had nine children, but because of one person’s hatred, all of them will now have to live the rest of their lives without a mother. “This epidemic of hate is not only killing us, but the people who stand with us too,” Human Rights Campaign president Kelley Robinson said in a statement to The Independent. On 18 August, 27-year-old Travis Ikeguchi, who had been spewing anti-LGBTQ+ hate on social media for quite some time, emerged from behind his computer, and fatally shot Carleton outside her Mag.Pi store on Hook Creek Road in Cedar Glen, California, according to the San Bernardino Sheriff’s Office. It was all because the fashion entrepreneur dared to hang a rainbow Pride flag outside her store. When someone would rip it down or damage it, she would simply hang up another one. But this time, Carleton was confronted about the rainbow flag by Ikeguchi as he tore it down while screaming homophobic slurs at her. He then pulled out a gun and shot her. Officers arrived to find she had suffered a single gunshot wound, before she died at the scene. Ikeguchi had fled the area, but was later tracked down by deputies. A standoff ensued and he opened fire on the officers before he was shot and killed. An investigation found a slew of anti-LGBTQ+ posts on Ikeguchi’s social media. The California man had posted images of Pride flags on fire, along with rants lashing out at the LGBTQ+ community and law enforcement. Sarah Moore, an Anti-LGBTQ+ Extremism analyst at the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), said the attack on Carleton is a “crucial example of what the ADL has been tracking in the latest trends over the past year.” “Pride flags have been targeted, whether it’s by burning them, stealing them or damaging them,” she said, adding that the flag is being used as a statement and an increasingly popular tactic against the LGBTQ+ community. Moore, who has viewed and analysed Ikeguchi’s social media, said there are not just anti-LGBTQ+ posts but also antisemitic and anti-Israel ones. “I want to stress that bias against the LGBTQ+ community often overlaps with other forms of hate,” she said. A report released in June by the ADL (the Anti-Defamation League) and the national LGBTQ+ organization GLAAD, recorded a total of 356 anti-LGBTQ+ incidents between June 2022 and April 2023, including 305 acts of harassment, 40 acts of vandalism and 11 incidents of assault. This is up from 2021-2022 where 223 incidents were recorded. The report also found that anti-LGBTQ+ incidents often overlapped with other forms of hate, with at least 128 incidents also citing antisemitic tropes and 30 incidents also citing racist tropes. Nearly half of all incidents (49 per cent) were perpetrated wholly or substantially by individuals associated with extremist groups, the report found. The most cited anti-LGBTQ+ trope was what the report called baseless “grooming” conspiracy theory, with at least 191 anti-LGBTQ+ incidents of harassment, vandalism and assault making explicit references to “grooming” or “pedophilia.” Carleton’s murder has since led to an outpouring of grief and anger from her children and family members, Hollywood stars and the LGBTQ+ community members who have warned that her killing is yet another devastating example of the increase in bigotry in violence across America. Human Rights Campaign president Kelley Robinson said in a statement that “threats against the LGBTQ+ community and our allies have evolved from violent rhetoric on social media and from anti-equality political leaders to, now, real-world violence — and let’s be honest, no city, state or person is immune from this brutality.” “The killing of Laura Ann Carleton, just for standing up for the LGBTQ+ community by displaying a Pride flag at her store, is devastating. Let’s be clear — the combination of hate and easy access to guns is killing too many of us. “From the rise of fatal violence against transgender and gender non-conforming people over the past decade, the loss of five innocent lives at Club Q in Colorado Springs, to the ruthless murder of O’Shea Sibley for vogueing at a gas station, we are seeing an escalation of hateful words turning into vicious, senseless attacks that has escalated into a nation-wide state of emergency for the LGBTQ+ community. Laura should be here with her husband and her family. This epidemic of hate is not only killing us, but the people who stand with us too.” The latest attack happened less than a month after O’Shae Sibley was murdered by a “good Christian boy” for dancing to a Beyoncé song in Brooklyn, New York. Sibley, 28, had been out celebrating a friend’s birthday when the group stopped at a Mobil gas station in Coney Island on 29 July. The professional dancer took off his shirt and was “vogueing” — a dance form popularised by the LGBTQ+ community — to Beyoncé’s Renaissance album with a friend on the station forecourt. Just after 11pm, a group of young men allegedly began hurling homophobic insults saying that they didn’t like “gay dancing” in their neighbourhood, according to eyewitnesses. Sibley confronted the men, surveillance footage showed, and the clash turned violent, ending with Sibley being stabbed in the heart during a scuffle. He died a short time later. Otis Pena, who was with Sibley when he was killed, said he and Sibley were “just pumping gas and listening to Renaissance and having a good time”. “O’Shae was just trying to tell people ‘we may be gay’ and they stabbed him right in the heart,” he continued, breaking down. “They murdered him because he was gay, because he stood up for his friends. All because he wanted people to know that we are gay.” Dmitriy Popov, 17, was later arrested and arraigned as an adult on murder and hate crime charges. He has pleaded not guilty. Eyewitnesses told the NYPD that Mr Popov had told the vogueing group that their dancing offended him as a Muslim. Mr Popov’s lawyer Mark Pollard told The Independent in an interview that his client was a “good Christian boy” who regularly attended church. “I have no idea where that came from. I just know he’s not Muslim. It’s very strange,” Mr Pollard told The Independent. Beyoncé, who was performing nearby at New York’s MetLife stadium on the night Sibley was killed, paid tribute to the dancer, choreographer and model, who family say was cut down “in his prime”. The killing attracted national attention due to its alleged homophobic nature, as attacks on the LGBTQ+ community are increasing. Last year, five people were shot dead and 17 others injured just for being at Club Q, a gay nightclub in Colorado Springs. On 19 November 2022, drag performer Del Lusional was hosting an alternative and punk show at the club — a DJ was set to follow. But then Anderson Lee Aldrich walked in and opened fire with an AR-15-style rifle killing bar staff Daniel Aston, 28, and Derrick Rump, 38, along with Kelly Loving, 40; Ashley Paugh, 35; and Raymond Green Vance, 22. Aldrich was charged with 305 criminal counts, including first-degree murder, attempted murder, assault, and at least 48 counts of committing crimes motivated by anti-LGBT+ bias. Prosecutors argued that Aldrich be charged with hate crimes, pointing out that his mother was reportedly nonbinary and forced him to go to LGBT+ clubs. Aldrich ultimately accepted a plea deal, reducing the number of charges to 53, but which included all five first-degree murder charges, 46 attempted first-degree murder charges, and two bias-driven crimes charges. Threats against the LGBTQ+ community emerged in June when Target’s Pride Month displays came under fire. Several videos posted on social media show customers destroying the displays and heavily criticising the retail company for including LGBTQ+ attire. This included a “tuck-friendly” bathing suit option and greeting cards that used inclusive language. The backlash forced the retail giant to pull some of its Pride Month merchandise after several of its employees experienced “confrontational behavior” from angry customers. “Since introducing this year’s collection, we’ve experienced threats impacting our team embers’ sense of safety and well-being while at work,” Target said in a statement. A Target spokesperson told The Wall Street Journal that several angry customers made “threatening posts on social media with video from inside stores” in addition to confronting workers. “Given these volatile circumstances, we are making adjustments to our plans, including removing items that have been at the center of the most significant confrontational behavior. Our focus now is on moving forward with our continuing commitment to the LGBTQIA+ community and standing with them as we celebrate Pride Month and throughout the year,” Target said in a statement. Target isn’t the only company grappling with public criticism. Bud Light is still dealing with fallout from its partnership with transgender influencer Dylan Mulvaney, who in April posted a picture on Instagram of a beer can with her face on it. Mulvaney, a transgender influencer, was the target of disparaging right-wing attacks for weeks after she partnered with Budweiser to promote Bud Light. In response to the hate-filled and transphobic backlash that followed, the company said it “never intended to be part of a discussion that divides people," but didn’t directly address the rhetoric or signal clear support for Mulvaney. Bud Light’s parent company, Anheuser-Busch, is tripling its US marketing spending this summer as it tries to restore lost sales. Anheuser-Busch, the producer of Budweiser beers, issued a statement at the time in response to the conservative boycott, saying that it “never intended to be part of a discussion that divides people”. “We have thousands of partners, millions of fans and a proud history supporting our communities, military, first responders, sports fans and hard-working Americans everywhere,” said CEO Brendan Whitworth. “We never intended to be part of a discussion that divides people. We are in the business of bringing people together over a beer.” In response to the increasing attacks on the LGBTQ+ community and allies, many have called for a change. Wendy Via, co-founder of Global Project Against Hate and Extremism, said in a statement this week, that this will continue to result in violence if this rhetoric and push for irrational, hateful, and rights-restricting legislation isn’t stopped.” “From the arson of a church in Texas, to the firebombing of a coffee shop in Oklahoma, to the disruption of library story hours, the threatening of school boards, and the banning of books, to the horrific murders at Club Q in Colorado last November, the threats and the violence facing LGBTQ+ people and allies is all too real,” Wendy Via, co-founder of Global Project Against Hate and Extremism, said in a statement this week. “The man who shot and killed Laura Ann Carleton after disparaging the LGBTQ+ pride flag she proudly hung in her store window had a history of anti-LGBTQ+ posts on social media sites. Yet again, anti-LGBTQ+ hate turned to violence, and an innocent woman tragically lost her life. Now, an entire community is not only reeling from the tragic death, but LGBTQ+ people and their allies everywhere are once again reminded in the worst possible way of the very real threat of hate and violence they face every day. “The killing of Laura Ann Carleton proves anti-LGBTQ+ hate and violence are out of control in the US and around the world. Efforts to demonize, intimidate, and provoke violence against LGBTQ+ people have increased over the past year globally. It would be naive to separate these violent attacks from the anti-LGBTQ+ efforts of some politicians and far-right organizations. “As we’ve said before, the relentless dehumanization and demonization of LGBTQ+ people by far-right politicians, extremist religious leaders, and hateful ideology adherents — often spread online — will continue to result in violence if this rhetoric and push for irrational, hateful, and rights-restricting legislation isn’t stopped.” Read More A mother and businesswoman whose LGBTQ advocacy cost her her life: Who was Laura Ann Carleton? Laura Carleton shooting – latest: Travis Ikeguchi’s anti-LGBT+ online history revealed after Pride flag murder Travis Ikeguchi: What we know about the gunman who shot Laura Carleton over Pride flag

A Christian website designer in Colorado did not want to provide her services to same-sex couples, potentially running afoul of state law that prohibits public-facing businesses from discriminating against LGBT+ people. The designer didn’t have any same-sex clients. She didn’t receive any requests from gay couples to work on their wedding websites. But in her legal challenge, supported by an influential right-wing legal group that backed a lawsuit ending Roe v Wade, she argued that Colorado’s law infringed on her First Amendment rights. In its final day of its current term, the US Supreme Court’s conservative supermajority agreed, potentially endangering already vulnerable rights of LGBT+ Americans and state governments’ abilities to protect them. But a crucial piece of evidence in the case appears to have been fabricated. A man who is named throughout the case, and whose phone number and email address were attached in court filings, claims he has nothing to do with it. In 2016, Lorie Smith claimed in filings that a man named “Stewart” contacted her website to help with his upcoming wedding to a person named “Mike”: “We are getting married early next year and would love some design work done for our invites, placenames etc. We might also stretch to a website.” The New Republic found “Stewart”. He said he is straight, married to a woman, and never contacted Ms Smith. His alleged request for services came within 24 hours after Ms Smith first filed her lawsuit in state court. “If somebody’s pulled my information, as some kind of supporting information or documentation, somebody’s falsified that,” he explained to The New Republic. “I’m married, I have a child – I’m not really sure where that came from? But somebody’s using false information in a Supreme Court filing document.” It remains unclear, even after the Supreme Court’s decision, how and why he is involved. In a statement to The Independent, attorneys for Ms Smith dismissed his reaction and claimed that the service request was genuine. A spokesperson for Colorado’s attorney general pointed to earlier claims that there was no proof that it was. Meanwhile, the statements “Stewart” claims to never have made, and arguments from attorneys who use his name and alleged statements, remain printed across several court documents. In a motion filed by attorneys for Colorado in 2016 to dismiss the case, they pointed out that Ms Smith had never received any request for services and had no standing to sue. A response from the Alliance Defending Freedom, the conservative Christian group representing Ms Smith, asserted that it was not necessary to have received any such inquiry before challenging state law. Months later, in February 2017, in an effort to bolster their challenge to state law, attorneys for the group said that Ms Smith received an inquiry, weeks before Colorado attorneys asked to dismiss the case. “Notably, any claim that Lorie will never receive a request to create a custom website celebrating a same-sex ceremony is no longer legitimate because Lorie has received such a request,” according to the filing. Later that year, following a court ruling in Colorado’s favour, the group mentioned “Stewart” and “Mike” in a press release. In a December 2021 filing with the Supreme Court, attorneys for Colorado responded to the alleged request again, noting that the inquiry “was not a request for a website at all, but just a response to an online form asking about ‘invites’ and ‘place-names,’ with a statement that the person ‘might also stretch to a website.’” The Alliance Defending Freedom fired back in a reply brief, once again mentioning a request that may not even exist: “Colorado’s claim – that a request from ‘Mike’ and ‘Stewart’ for a wedding website does not reflect a same-sex wedding request – blinks reality.” The Independent asked representatives for the Alliance Defending Freedom how “Stewart” became involved with the case. Senior counsel Kellie Fiedorek said The New Republic’s findings are a “last-minute attempt to malign Lorie [that] smacks of desperation to delegitimize her civil rights case and our judicial system.” “It’s undisputed that Lorie received this request through her website. She doesn’t do background checks on incoming requests to determine if the person submitting it is genuine,” she added. “Whether Lorie received a legitimate request or whether someone lied to her is irrelevant. No one should have to wait to be punished by the government to challenge an unjust law.” A spokesperson for the office of Colorado’s attorney general did not have a comment prior to the ruling but pointed The Independent to its brief with the Supreme Court noting that Ms Smith did not take “any steps to verify that a genuine prospective customer submitted the form.” The Supreme Court’s decision is a blow to LGBT+ advocates who fear the case could open the door for rollbacks to discrimination protections, with Justice Sonia Sotomayor noting that the ruling comes in the middle of a wave of state laws targeting LGBT+ people. “This case cannot be understood outside of the context in which it arises,” she wrote in her dissent. “In that context, the outcome is even more distressing. … In this pivotal moment, the Court had an opportunity to reaffirm its commitment to equality on behalf of all members of society, including LGBT people. It does not do so.” A statement from Kelley Robinson, president of the Human Rights Campaign, the nation’s largest LGBT+ civil rights organization, said the court’s decision “is a dangerous step backward, giving some businesses the power to discriminate against people simply because of who we are.” President Joe Biden, noting the decision’s arrival on the final day of Pride Month, said he is “deeply concerned that the decision could invite more discrimination” against LGBT+ Americans. “More broadly, today’s decision weakens long-standing laws that protect all Americans against discrimination in public accommodations – including people of color, people with disabilities, people of faith, and women,” he added. Read More Supreme Court allows Colorado designer to deny LGBT+ customers in ruling on last day of Pride Month The Supreme Court just made me a second-class citizen ‘It’s hard on our family’: For these lawmakers with trans children, Republican attacks are personal

The visit comes as US lawmakers debate sending another $24bn (£19bn) to Ukraine.

Power use in Texas hit a preliminary all-time high on Tuesday as homes and businesses cranked up air

By David Shepardson WASHINGTON (Reuters) -The U.S Environmental Protection Agency on Wednesday issued a final determination declaring that emissions from

A week after Guatemala’s June 25 elections boosted a relative long-shot candidate into the final second round of voting, the country’s top court has frozen certification of the election results

The Texas power grid operator said late on Wednesday it was resuming normal operations after lifting emergency measures,

South Carolina moves up to No. 1 after a chaotic opening week that saw nine of the first 14 teams lose, including previous top choice LSU and second-ranked UConn

The family of a 14-year-old girl who allegedly discovered an iPhone taped to the back of a toilet seat on a recent flight from Charlotte, North Carolina, to Boston said they believe she was targeted by a member of the crew

European biotech firm Argenx SE is scheduled to release key drug trial data this summer. Deal-hungry Big Pharma

What do the transgender whistleblower Chelsea Manning, the 1950s Soviet spy Julius Rosenberg and former president Donald Trump all have in common? The answer, following the indictment arising from the discovery of classified documents at Mr Trump's Mar-a-Lago home in Florida, is that all four have been investigated under suspicion of violating the Espionage Act of 1917. When the FBI raided Mr Trump’s property last August, they were looking for items that might violate the Act, which regulates the handling of confidential documents relating to national security. Most often used against spies, whistleblowers and government employees who leak documents to journalists, the Espionage Act carries a maximum sentence of ten years in prison. So what exactly is Mr Trump being investigated for? A contentious law with roots in First World War paranoia The Espionage Act is a controversial and often contested law that dates from America’s entry into the First World War against Germany in 1917. Even before joining the conflict, President Woodrow Wilson had urged Congress to crack down on immigrant groups and radical political movements that he claimed had “poured the poison of disloyalty into the very arteries of our national life”. At the time, German-Americans were a large and influential ethnic group, with those born in Germany comprising 2.7 per cent of the US population and 18.5 per cent of the foreign-born population, according to the census of 1910. Over 27 per cent of the nation’s “foreign white stock” spoke German as their mother tongue. There were German-language schools, churches, and newspapers throughout the country, which faced backlash from English-speaking groups. Passed just two months after Wilson joined the war and bolstered one year later in 1918, the Espionage Act criminalised many forms of dissent against the war, leading to jail sentences against speech-makers, leafleteers, film-makers and newspaper editors. The act’s more radical provisions were dismantled after the war, but other parts remain in force – including those listed in Section 793 of the US Code of Laws, which bans citizens from leaking or mishandling information relating to “national defence”. Since then, the Act has been used to prosecute the Soviet spies Julius and Ethel Rosenberg, the Pentagon Papers whistleblower Daniel Ellsberg, National Security Agency leakers Edward Snowden and Chelsea Manning and various other people who leaked US government secrets to journalists, the public or other nation states. What does the Espionage Act ban? US Code Section 793 forbids various forms of obtaining, leaking or failing to properly look after “information respecting the national defence”. For example, it forbids anyone to acquire any information about US national security facilities if they intend or have reason to believe that the information might be used “to the injury of the United States or the advantage of any foreign nation”. The Act also bans people lawfully entrusted with defence information that could harm the US from giving it to any unauthorised person, or from “wilfully retaining” it and failing to deliver it “to the officer entitled to receive it”. Another provision, wider in scope, makes it a crime for anyone trusted with such information (such as presidents) to let it be “removed from its proper place of custody”, lost, stolen, or otherwise waylaid “through gross negligence”. The same provision requires officials who become aware of such an incident to “make prompt report to his superior officer”, although it is unclear who Mr Trump’s “superior officer” would be in this case. According to the search warrant issued to agents last summer, the FBI seized various boxes and folders described as including “miscellaneous secret documents” and “miscellaneous top secret documents”. What could happen to Donald Trump now? Mr Trump has claimed he is being wrongly persecuted since the investigation began, just as he did throughout his presidency when his election campaign’s possible ties to Russia were closely examined. “This raid of President Trump’s home was not just unprecedented, but unnecessary – and now they are leaking lies and innuendos to try to explain away the weaponisation of government against their dominant political opponent,” a spokesman said in response to August’s raid. In response to his indictment on Thursday (8 June), Mr Trump wrote on his Truth Social platform: “The corrupt Biden Administration has informed my attorneys that I have been Indicted, seemingly over the Boxes Hoax. “I have been summoned to appear at the Federal Courthouse in Miami on Tuesday, at 3 PM. I never thought it possible that such a thing could happen to a former President of the United States, who received far more votes than any sitting President in the History of our Country, and is currently leading, by far, all Candidates, both Democrat and Republican, in Polls of the 2024 Presidential Election. I AM AN INNOCENT MAN!” If he is ultimately prosecuted and convicted, Mr Trump could be fined or imprisoned for up to 10 years, as well as forfeiting any property bought with proceeds of the crime. A conviction could potentially prevent him from holding political office again, not only because of the reputational damage but because the Fourteenth Amendment to the US constitution bans candidates who “have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against [the US], or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof”. When the Socialist German-American journalist and former congressman Victor Berger was elected to a second term in 1918, Congress refused to seat him because he had been sentenced to 20 years in jail under the Espionage Act. However, with Mr Trump’s Republican allies rallying to his defence – and promising to investigate the way the FBI have treated him – who knows where this saga could end? Read More Trump indictment – latest: Trump faces 100-year jail sentence as he declares ‘I am an innocent man’ Trump unleashes on ‘woke military’ and says America is ‘going to hell’ in bizarre Truth Social rant Read Trump’s furious reaction to indictment: ‘This is war’ Trump has been indicted again: These are the investigations he faces Ivanka and Jared split over attending Trump 2024 launch – follow live Why was Donald Trump impeached twice during his first term? Four big lies Trump told during his 2024 presidential announcement

One of Libya’s rival prime ministers says he has suspended his foreign minister after Israel revealed that its chief diplomat met with her last week