For decades, LGBTQ+ employees inside the CIA fought to move from secrecy and suspicion to visibility and acceptance.

Three former intelligence officers now warn that some of that progress is being undone.

In a new essay published by Lawfare, former CIA officers Trace Ballard, Julia Curlee, and Todd Johannessen argue that the dismantling of LGBTQ+ programs and diversity initiatives inside the intelligence community could create what they describe as a new Lavender Scare.

The phrase carries serious historical weight.

During the original Lavender Scare, thousands of gay and lesbian federal workers were investigated, fired, forced to resign, or blocked from government jobs because officials viewed homosexuality as a national-security threat.

The former officers say today’s policies are not identical to that era. But they believe the similarities are serious enough to sound an alarm.

What Was the Original Lavender Scare?

The Lavender Scare began alongside the better-known Red Scare of the 1940s and 1950s.

At the time, federal officials argued that gay and lesbian employees could be blackmailed by foreign governments because their sexuality was often hidden.

In 1953, President Dwight D. Eisenhower signed Executive Order 10450. The policy treated what it called “sexual perversion” as a security concern and helped formalize the removal of LGBTQ+ workers from federal employment.

Historians estimate that thousands of workers lost careers during that period.

The damage lasted for decades.

Federal restrictions against gay employees did not fully begin to disappear until the 1970s and 1990s.

The CIA Eventually Changed Course

The CIA’s relationship with LGBTQ+ employees evolved slowly.

In the early years, gay officers could be questioned during polygraph examinations and removed from service. By the 1980s, homosexuality was still considered when evaluating security clearances.

Major changes arrived in the 1990s.

President Bill Clinton signed an executive order in 1995 that prohibited the denial of security clearances based solely on sexual orientation. Another order in 1998 extended protections throughout federal employment.

Inside the CIA, LGBTQ+ employees created ANGLE, the Agency Network for Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, and Transgender Officers and Allies, in 1996.

Over time, the organization helped promote recruiting, workplace education, Pride programming, and support for LGBTQ+ employees.

By the 2010s, the CIA was publicly recognizing LGBTQ+ employees and encouraging them to serve openly.

That transformation took decades.

Former officers now worry parts of it are disappearing in a matter of months.

What Has Changed?

The Lawfare authors point to several developments since the second Trump administration took office in January 2025.

The administration ordered federal agencies to end diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility initiatives. At the CIA, that resulted in the end of the agency’s diversity office and the suspension of ANGLE activities.

The authors also say Pride Month celebrations were banned, minority recruitment efforts were ended, pronouns were restricted in internal email signatures, and LGBTQ-related material was removed from agency websites.

Employees who had worked in diversity programs were also placed on leave or dismissed.

A federal judge ruled in 2025 that the CIA director had authority to terminate some of those officers without requiring reassignment.

The CIA has defended broader efforts to change agency culture as part of a push to remove what current leadership views as political or ideological influence from intelligence work. Earlier this year, CIA Director John Ratcliffe also ordered several intelligence products retracted or revised after internal and external reviews concluded they failed to meet analytic standards.

That distinction matters.

The former officers describe the changes as dangerous for LGBTQ+ inclusion.

The current CIA leadership frames many of its changes as an effort to return the agency to mission-focused, politically neutral intelligence work.

Transgender Officers Face the Sharpest Impact

The former officers say transgender employees are experiencing the most serious consequences.

Federal policies now restrict transgender employees from using restrooms that match their gender identity in some government settings. New policies also require federal documents to reflect sex assigned at birth rather than gender identity.

The authors argue that these policies can create unusual problems inside intelligence agencies.

An identity document that does not match an officer’s appearance may create complications during overseas assignments. They warn that this could even affect operational security in some situations.

The authors also point to the 2025 firing of roughly 100 transgender intelligence employees who participated in an officially sanctioned group chat involving transgender-related discussions. Three CIA employees were reportedly among those dismissed.

Former CIA officer Julia Curlee has spoken publicly about her own experience.

Curlee, a transgender woman who spent 25 years in national security, has said she was able to serve at the highest levels of government before eventually being pushed out after her transgender identity became publicly known.

Is This Really Another Lavender Scare?

The comparison is powerful, but even the former officers acknowledge the differences.

They say they are not aware of CIA officers currently being interrogated about their sexual orientation.

They also say gay, lesbian, and bisexual officers are not presently facing a systematic purge.

Marriage equality remains federal law.

Employment protections based on sexual orientation and gender identity also remain grounded in the Supreme Court’s 2020 Bostock decision.

Still, the former officers say the atmosphere matters.

They argue that removing support networks, ending Pride activities, firing diversity staff, and targeting transgender employees can discourage LGBTQ+ people from entering or remaining in intelligence careers.

That is where they see the strongest parallel to the past.

Why This Could Become a National-Security Issue

The CIA depends on recruiting people with specialized languages, technical skills, cultural knowledge, and international experience.

Former intelligence officers argue that narrowing the pool of people willing to serve could weaken the agency.

The concern is not simply about representation.

It is about talent.

A highly skilled analyst, cyber specialist, linguist, or operations officer does not suddenly become less useful because that person is gay, lesbian, bisexual, or transgender.

The old Lavender Scare treated identity itself as a vulnerability.

These former officers fear the government could once again send a message that LGBTQ+ identity makes someone less welcome in national security.

History Does Not Have to Repeat Exactly to Matter

History rarely repeats itself in identical form.

It echoes.

Today’s federal government is not the federal government of 1953. LGBTQ+ Americans have legal protections, political power, and public visibility that previous generations could barely imagine.

But rights and institutional culture are not permanent simply because they once improved.

The CIA’s own history shows that change can move in both directions.

It took decades for LGBTQ+ officers to go from being considered security risks to being openly recruited and celebrated.

That is why three veterans of the intelligence community are warning people to pay attention now.

They are not saying history has fully repeated itself.

They are saying they recognize enough of the pattern to worry about where it could lead.

And when people who spent decades inside one of America’s most secretive institutions decide to speak publicly, that warning is worth hearing.

DIN Is Following This Story

Subscribe to DIN for LGBTQ+ politics, history, culture, national news, and original reporting that connects today’s headlines to our community.