Founder Says Case Raises Larger Questions About LGBTQ+ Visibility, Selective Enforcement, and Political Pressure Surrounding Inclusion
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
June 1, 2026
MEDIA CONTACT:
Sam Castañeda Holdren
sam@outincolombia.com
(602) 727-2340
PHOENIX, Ariz. — June 1, 2026 — On the first day of Pride Month, LGBTQ+ travel brand Queer Scout and internationally recognized LGBTQ+ tourism company OUT in Colombia filed their formal response to a federal lawsuit brought by the Boy Scouts of America, asking the court to dismiss the case and marking the first day of Pride Month with a public message of visibility, dignity, and refusal to retreat.
The response, filed Monday in federal court, challenges an attempt by Boy Scouts of America, now publicly operating as Scouting America, to pursue the case in Texas and disputes the premise that consumers would confuse an LGBTQ+ travel and experiences company serving adults in Colombia with a youth scouting organization.
“This case is about more than a name,” said Sam Castañeda Holdren, founder of OUT in Colombia and Queer Scout. “It is about visibility. It is about whether LGBTQ+ businesses are allowed to exist openly and proudly in public life without intimidation. Pride has always been about refusing to disappear — and today, we are choosing visibility over silence.”
Boy Scouts of America sued Queer Scout and OUT in Colombia in February, alleging trademark infringement and related claims over their use of the word “scout.” Queer Scout operates LGBTQ+ travel experiences, cultural tourism, nightlife experiences and curated journeys focused on authenticity, connection and visibility.
David G. Bray of Dickinson Wright, who is leading the broader legal strategy in the matter, said the lawsuit represents a significant escalation beyond a traditional trademark dispute and raises broader questions about the scope and limits of trademark enforcement.
“Scouting America has filed a federal lawsuit seeking to significantly expand the scope of its trademark rights in the common term ‘scout’ and its ability to control who can and cannot use it,” Bray said. “Our clients strongly dispute the notion that reasonable consumers would confuse a gay travel company serving adults in Colombia with a youth scouting organization. We believe the court should closely examine both the jurisdictional basis for bringing this case in Texas and the legal theories being asserted.”
The case has drawn national and international attention because of the unusual power imbalance at its center: a small business founded by an openly gay entrepreneur is standing up to one of the country’s most historically influential legacy organizations.
“This is not a dispute between two giant corporations,” Holdren said. “I am an openly gay small-business owner standing up and saying: We have a right to exist openly, too.”
The lawsuit escalated during a period of intense public pressure surrounding Scouting America’s diversity and inclusion policies. On the evening of February 2, Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell publicly stated that Scouting America’s relationship with the Department of Defense depended on the organization moving away from LGBTQ-inclusive policies. The following day, according to a declaration filed in the related trademark opposition proceedings, Scouting America Executive Vice President and General Counsel Joseph A. Zirkman authorized the federal lawsuit against Queer Scout.
On February 25, Scouting America escalated the dispute into federal court. The following day, press reports, including NPR reporting, indicated Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth was backing away from threats involving federal support after reaching an agreement with Scouting America regarding the organization’s diversity and inclusion policies. On February 27, the Department of Defense publicly announced the agreement.
“We cannot ignore the broader context in which this lawsuit escalated,” Holdren said. “People are naturally going to ask questions when an openly LGBTQ+ company becomes the target of aggressive federal litigation during a period of escalating political pressure surrounding LGBTQ+ visibility and inclusion.”
Bray said the case raises broader questions about the limits of trademark enforcement, especially when common language and expressive branding are involved.
“Trademark law has limits,” Bray said. “This case raises important questions about fairness, due process, and the scope of trademark rights when common language is used in unrelated industries and contexts.”
Bray also noted that numerous federally registered trademarks containing the word “scout” coexist on the federal trademark register in unrelated industries, raising questions about the scope and consistency of the claims being asserted in this case.
The legal defense is now being led by national law firm Dickinson Wright, building upon work originally initiated by Jeremy Kapteyn at KW Law in the related trademark opposition proceedings.
Holdren said the ability to fight back publicly has only been possible because of community support.
“Many small businesses never get the opportunity to meaningfully defend themselves when faced with this kind of pressure,” Holdren said. “This fight has only been possible because people across the LGBTQ+ community and beyond recognized that this case is bigger than us. They understood what visibility means.”
“With the support of the community, we’ve been able to assemble an incredible legal team and stand up publicly rather than quietly disappear,” Holdren added.
Community members and allies have continued to support Queer Scout’s legal defense and advocacy efforts through a public fundraising campaign:
https://www.gofundme.com/f/stand-with-queer-scout
“Pride Month exists because visibility matters,” Holdren said. “We are here. We are visible. And we are not going away.”
###
PRESS KIT
Media resources related to this announcement, including legal filings, background information, photos, logos, and other supporting materials, are available here:
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1bGJGmxddzP5602RH8IOL1QNWTZ4uAP29?usp=sharing
Contents include:
-
Defendants’ Response/Motion
-
Complaint and Related Court Filings
-
Zirkman Declaration
-
Company Background Information
-
Media Coverage Timeline
-
High-Resolution Photos
-
Logo Files
-
References & Source Materials