Author: johntarheel76

Removal of LGBTQ+ option from 988 hotline is straining overburdened Texas crisis centers

Read more at Houston Public Radio.

For Julia Hewitt, the removal of LGBTQ+ services from the 988 Suicide and Crisis Lifeline and potential funding freezes and cuts are a personal and professional issue.

As a suicide prevention leader with the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention, a lived experience adviser with Vibrant Emotional Health, which oversees the crisis line in Texas, and a parent of an LGBTQ child raised in Texas, Hewitt, who as a child witnessed her mother struggle with suicidal ideation, has spent decades putting her energy into providing reliable crisis services for everyone who needs them.

But now, she’s watching the foundation she and others created crumble.

“It was a punch to the gut because if you work or volunteer in this space, you know the families who are impacted by this; it can be hard to reconcile when you know how much good this does,” Hewitt said. “When access narrows for those at highest risk, the system becomes less protective overall.”

The 988 Lifeline was created through bipartisan legislation signed into law by President Donald Trump during his first term. This nationwide network of locally based crisis centers offers one-on-one support for mental health, suicide, and substance use-related problems for anyone 24/7.

When someone called 988 in the past, they would hear a greeting message, followed by a menu of choices offering access to specially trained counselors for veterans, Spanish speakers, and LGBTQ+ youth, or sometimes a local crisis counselor.

But last summer, the Trump administration announced in a press release that it will no longer silo LGBTQ+ youth services, which had been the “Press 3 option” for 988 callers, to focus on serving “all help seekers,” saying that these specific LGBTQ+ services had become too expensive.

The Trump administration and theSubstance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, the federal agency that provides the majority of the funding for the 988 Lifeline, said the specialized LGBTQ subnetwork’s initial pilot budget of $33 million had been exceeded and unifying services for all callers was a better option.

After the change, only veterans and Spanish speakers still received a tailored option through the 988 call line.

The call line had received nearly 1.3 million contacts nationally from LGBTQ+ people since its launch in 2022 — leaving a void that Texas crisis care centers, already operating at a $7 million funding deficit, are expected to fill.

In Texas, calls made to the line have increased over the years. In December 2025, the Texas 988 system received 25,511. A year prior, that figure was 18,916 and in December 2023, it was 14,961. It’s not clear from publicly available data how many calls are rerouted to LGBTQ+ subnetworks.

Texas Health and Human Services officials said the agency doesn’t have data on how many calls are rerouted to a subnetwork.

Veterans and LGBTQ+ youth have a higher risk of suicide compared to the general population, and canceling specialized services for only one group has mental health experts questioning the administration’s true intent.

“The program was created with overwhelming bipartisan support because, despite our political differences, we should all agree that every young person’s life is worth saving,” Jaymes Black, CEO of the Trevor Project, an organization that helped create option 3, said in a statement. “I am heartbroken that this administration has decided to say, loudly and clearly, that they believe some young people’s lives are not worth saving.”

This comes at a time when some federal funding for the hotline is set to expire, and budget freezes and cuts are wreaking havoc on the network of local crisis centers that the entire 988 infrastructure depends on.

“Currently, Texas’s 988 system faces a convergence of challenges,” said Christine Busse, a peer policy fellow for the Texas branch of the National Alliance on Mental Illness, a nonprofit mental health organization that provides education and peer-to-peer support. “Without additional investment, meeting current demand — let alone absorbing the additional contacts previously handled by specialized services — will remain difficult.”

The removal of option 3

For many LGBTQ+ youth, the hotline was a safe space to be themselves, where they could be transferred to specialists within the LGBTQ+ Youth Subnetwork who usually had the lived experience to relate to them and help them talk through problems like drug and alcohol abuse, bullying, relationship troubles and suicidal thoughts.

Busse said the hotline handled up to 70,000 contacts per month nationwide, and her organization is troubled by its sudden removal because those young people are more than four times as likely to attempt suicide as their peers.

Specialized services are still offered by the Trevor Project and other organizations, but advocates say including them in 988 made it easy for people in crisis to get help by remembering just three numbers.

Now that options have been removed, LGBTQ+ youth are left with 988 dispatchers who are trained to handle a crisis, but might not have the lived experience or training needed to make someone feel safe during an emergency.

“While all callers can still reach trained counselors through 988, the loss of Option 3 eliminates a service designed to address the specific needs of a higher-risk population,” Busse said.

Some states like California have decided to address this issue by having experts from the Trevor Project train their operators. However, Texas lawmakers have not committed any additional resources to this effort.

“LGBTQ+ young people need more resources to end suicide, not fewer,” said Mark Henson, vice president of advocacy and government affairs at The Trevor Project.

Hewitt said she is confident that local operators will receive the specialized LGBTQ+ training to provide the needed care, but the issue is why they need to do it at all.

“There was an entire network that was created just for this, and that is the difference,” she said. “But this means additional training, and that equates to time, experience, people, and hours.”

Busse said another advantage of option 3 was that it routed calls from LGBTQ youth out of the 988 system to other organizations, and its cancellation means a heavier workload for everyone in the system.

The month-to-month data on the crisis hotline shows a steady increase in calls to Texas crisis centers that were already overburdened before the removal of the LGBTQ+ subnetworks.

“Texas’s 988 system was already strained before the removal of Option 3,” Busse said. “Without additional investment, meeting current demand — let alone absorbing the additional contacts previously handled by specialized services — will remain difficult.”

The cost of saving a life

The Texas 988 system currently receives $19 million in funding from two federal grants: the Mental Health Block Grant and the 988 State and Territory Improvement Award. The latter is set to expire in September, and it’s unclear whether Congress will extend it or whether the Trump administration will establish new funding streams.

This comes at a time when local crisis care centers, where many of the 988 call centers operate out of or partner with for their resources, are seeing investment in their services disappear and reappear at the whims of the federal government.

In a span of 24 hours earlier this month, the Trump administration announced wide-ranging budget cuts that many in health care warned would cripple mental health and crisis services across the nation. Amid a national outcry, the administration reversed its decision before the end of the day.

“People got letters, and everyone was panicking, and then it got reversed,” Hewitt said. “A great outcome, but this terminal uncertainty is creating a really poor experience for not only the client but also the person answering the calls.”

The 988 system wasn’t meant to be supported by the federal government forever, and Texas lawmakers like state Sen. José Menéndez have attempted to create a safety net for it.

Last year, lawmakers established the 988 Trust Fund through House Bill 5342 and required a study on sustainable funding mechanisms, including a potential state telecommunications fee, due by December. However, no state dollars have been appropriated to the trust.

Menéndez, who authored the bill that created the trust fund, said the idea of using a telecommunications fee, similar to the fee that supports 911, was quickly shot down at the Capitol.

“I’m concerned that if we don’t have any state funds, 988 is going to have to get reliant on philanthropy, fundraising, and other methods, and we have already started reaching out about how people can make contributions because this year some funds run out,” he said.

As federal funds continue to dwindle and the state shows little interest in propping up the service, the future of 988 in Texas might depend on donations from Texans.

“That uncertainty is precisely why legislative action is imperative,” Busse said. “The infrastructure exists; what is needed now is the commitment to fund it. Without dedicated funding mechanisms, such as a telecommunications fee, Texans risk facing a mental health crisis without the community support network that took years to build.”

For mental health support for LGBTQ youth, call the Trevor Project’s 24/7 toll-free support line at 866-488-7386. For trans peer support, call the Trans Lifeline at 877-565-8860. You can also reach a trained crisis counselor through the Suicide and Crisis Lifeline by calling or texting 988.

0

Iowa lawmakers may ban K-12 teaching about gender, sexual identity

Read more at the Des Moines Register.

Iowa’s public K-12 schools would be barred from teaching students about topics related to gender identity and sexual orientation at all grade levels under a bill expanding what critics have dubbed the state’s “Don’t Say Gay” law.

It would subject all of Iowa’s K-12 students to a law Gov. Kim Reynolds signed in 2023 that bans instruction on gender identity and sexual orientation through sixth grade. The wide-ranging education legislation also ordered schools to remove books that depict sex acts.

A Senate subcommittee voted 2-1 Wednesday, Jan. 21, to advance Senate Study Bill 2003, which would extend the prohibition on LGBTQ-related teaching through high school.

“I think just as not all parents want others to teach their children about sex education because it involves family religious beliefs about sexuality, so not all parents want others to teach children about sexual orientation and gender identity because it too involves family religious beliefs about sexuality and sexual ethics,” Sen. Sandy Salmon, R-Janesville, said.

She and Sen. Jesse Green, R-Boone, who introduced the bill, voted to advance it.

Iowa’s 2023 law, Senate File 496, is being challenged as unconstitutional in a federal lawsuit. A federal judge initially granted an injunction blocking parts of the law, including the ban on teaching about gender orientation and sexual identity, while the lawsuit is decided.

But the U.S. Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed his decision, allowing the law to take effect. Attorneys argued the law’s constitutionality in federal court last week.

Sen. Molly Donahue, D-Marion, voted against moving the bill forward, calling it a “distraction” from other issues facing the state.

“Iowans are definitely tired of this type of legislation, and we’re seeing that with the voting records, not just in Iowa but across the United States,” Donahue said. “We should be focused on prioritizing public schools, funding affordability for our people in this state and making sure that we’re balancing a budget in this state that is currently over $1 billion in deficit. We are focusing on the wrong things when we bring bills like this.”

Iowa is one of several Republican-led states, including Florida, with similar prohibitions on classroom teaching about gender identity and sexual orientation.

The bill says that Iowa’s public school districts and charter schools cannot provide “any program, curriculum, test, survey, questionnaire, promotion or instruction relating to gender theory or sexual orientation” to K-12 students.

Similar legislation has not advanced in past years, including in 2025 after a House proposal stalled once it passed out of subcommittee.

Opponents of the bill say ‘LGBTQ people exist’ regardless of classroom instruction

Opponents outnumbered supporters of the bill at the hearing Wednesday at the Capitol, as LGBTQ Iowans and LGBTQ rights groups shared opposition with lawmakers, while religious and conservative groups spoke in favor of the measure.

Kaylara Hoadley, of Mason City, cried as she showed lawmakers a photograph of her 15-year-old nonbinary child, saying the bill does not keep students safe.

As a caseworker for families in crisis, Hoadley said she supports youth who are homeless or facing other crises whose only safe space is their school.

“When the law silences teachers, counselors and staff, vulnerable youth suffer and suicide rates increase. … When does a child’s suicide matter to you?” she asked the Republican senators as her voice wavered.

Melissa Peterson, representing the Iowa State Education Association, said questions remain as to whether the current law is discriminatory toward LGBTQ students as it remains tied up in court and urged lawmakers to oppose expanding the law.

“We want to get back to basics and provide a safe learning environment for every single one of our students as closely to as free from discrimination as possible,” Peterson said.

Damian Thompson, external affairs director for Iowa Safe Schools, said the bill would amplify the existing law’s constitutional problems by applying it to older students who have well-established constitutional rights.

“High school students can vote soon, they can serve in the military and they’re expected to understand complex and social and health issues as they enter adulthood,” Thompson said. “Federal courts have been consistently clear that students do not shed their First Amendment rights when they enter a public school.”

Bethany Snyder, of Urbandale, who has a trans partner and is a lesbian mother to a freshman at Valley High School, said silence isolates children and does not protect them.

“My partner and I grew up in that silence,” Snyder said. “We didn’t see ourselves reflected in school. We learned very early what shame sounds like in the absence of words. High school should prepare students for the real world and the real world. LGBTQ people exist as parents, coworkers, legislators, historical figures and leaders and families like mine and families like hers.”

Her daughter Evelynn Snyder-Maul said she has never received instruction on gender identity in school beyond sharing that she has a trans father and queer mother.

“If I’m telling someone about my family, could I get reported?” Snyder-Maul said. “However, that is the least of my concerns. Lawmakers who want to pass this bill are snowflakes. You think that love is inappropriate and you think that it is forcing kids to believe they like the same gender. If your kid is gay, whether they are taught that gay exists or not, they are still going to be gay.”

Supporters say schools should teach ‘fundamentals,’ not discuss LGBTQ topics

Danny Carroll, a senior policy adviser with The Family Leader and a former state lawmaker, said the bill would “remove unnecessary distraction” from Iowa classrooms.

“I think Iowans have grown a little bit weary of the distraction — and sometimes very loud and profane distraction — that gender theory has brought on, and I think they’re inclined to think perhaps we should return our schools to some of the fundamentals of learning and put this aside,” Carroll said. “I can see no way that this would interfere with teaching goodwill, friendship, respect for each other.”

Patty Alexander, a retired educator from Indianola, said discussing sexual identity is not an educator’s job.

“We do not believe in labeling students or grouping them by sexual preferences,” Alexander said. “We are here to meet their learning needs. We are not mental health counselors, and forcing us to group and label students only divides and causes rifts. Forcing us to discuss sexuality furthers the mistrust of educators between parents and their children.”

Jeff Pitts, representing the Iowa Faith and Freedom Coalition, said the group supports expanding the existing law through high school.

“Our schools are not the place to promote political ideology,” Pitts said.

0

Virginia takes one step closer to enshrining marriage equality in its state constitution

Read more at LGBTQ Nation.

The Virginia Senate voted this past Friday in favor of repealing an amendment to the state constitution that defines marriage as only between a man and a woman.

Senate Joint Resolution 3, introduced by state Sen. Adam Ebbin (D), passed the chamber in a 26-13 vote and would ban the state “from denying the issuance of a marriage license to two adult persons seeking a lawful marriage on the basis of the sex, gender, or race of such persons.” It also requires Virginia to “recognize any lawful marriage between two adult persons and to treat such marriages equally under the law, regardless of the sex, gender, or race of such persons.”

A proposed Constitutional amendment must be voted on by two successive state legislatures before heading to the ballot, where voters ultimately decide its fate. Both chambers voted in favor of the resolution in 2025, and the House of Delegates already approved it again earlier this month. As such, the resolution will go to voters during the November 2026 elections.

Virginia’s 2006 constitutional ban on same-sex marriage has been unenforceable since the 2015 Supreme Court Obergefell v. Hodges decision that legalized marriage equality nationwide. In 2024, amid increasing threats that the Court may reexamine the decision, then-Gov. Glenn Youngkin (R) (who is generally anti-LGBTQ+) signed a bill codifying same-sex marriage in the Commonwealth.

The law now ensures same-sex marriage remains legal in Virginia regardless of any change in federal protections, but those championing the constitutional amendment say it’s still not enough.

“It’s time for the Virginia constitution to accurately reflect the law of the land. Full stop,” Ebbin said in a statement. “20 years ago, the Virginia Bill of Rights was unnecessarily stained in an overreaction. It’s past time to fix that and see that loving Virginia couples are not mistreated or discriminated against. I am confident that the voters will ratify this marriage equality amendment in November.”

“It’s about time Virginia gets this done,” added state Rep. Mark Sickles (D), who introduced the resolution in the House of Delegates. “All Virginia couples deserve the freedom to marry without fear that their rights could be rolled back. By advancing this amendment, we’re ensuring that the freedom to marry is protected by the people. It’s up to the voters now and I’m confident they’ll do the right thing in November.”

Virginia’s resolution comes after a new trend last year in which several Republican-led states introduced resolutions calling for the Supreme Court to overturn Obergefell. Two justices on the Supreme Court have openly stated that they want to overturn Obergefell, which has stirred fears in the LGBTQ+ community as the court has moved increasingly to the right.

In a victory for LGBTQ+ people, the Supreme Court opted in November not to hear an appeal from former Kentucky county clerk Kim Davis asking the court to reconsider its marriage equality decision.

Even if the Supreme Court had taken the case, Chris Geidner, the gay publisher and author of Law Dork, told LGBTQ Nation last year that he didn’t think a case like Davis’ would provide sufficient legal reasoning to overturn same-sex marriage entirely.

Rather, he said that a successful religious freedom or free speech challenge to Obergefell would do other “bad things,” like hollow out civil protections or public accommodations for same-sex couples, essentially inconveniencing or endangering them, but not outright denying them the right to a marriage license.

0

Spotlight on Mauritania, where LGBT people hide their identities for fear of stigma

Read more at Erasing 76 Crimes.

Mauritania criminalizes same-sex sexual activity under its Penal Code, which provides a maximum possible sentence of death by stoning for men. However, in 2021, the government confirmed its de facto moratorium on the death penalty.

There have been reports of people being arrested and detained for these charges in recent years, as well as LGBTIQ people being harassed.

LGBTIQ visibility is fairly low in Mauritania, which contributes to social stigma. Due to the fear of discrimination and rejection, many LGBTIQ people remain private about their identities.

The country became a refuge for Senegalese LGBTIQ people after 2008, when homosexuality became the subject of recurrent public controversies in Senegal. Some Senegalese LGBTIQ people have been granted refugee status by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) but face serious legal dangers, health risks, and social rejection, making it difficult for them to get the help and protection they need.

[Mauritania’s anti-homosexuality law] specifically applies to Muslim men, though it is not clear if it applies equally to non-Muslim men.

There is some evidence of the law being enforced in recent years, with LGBT people being occasionally subject to arrest. A high-profile incident in 2020 saw ten people arrested and detained on same-sex activity charges, with eight of them being prosecuted and sentenced. There have been limited reports of discrimination and violence being committed against LGBT people in recent years, and the lack of reporting is attributed to social stigma.

In January, ten people were arrested and detained after video footage emerged on social media of what was alleged to be a same-sex wedding. [In the capital,] Nouakchott Police Commissioner, Mohamed Ould Nejib, subsequently acknowledged in a television interview that the event had not been a same-sex wedding but was simply a birthday celebration. He indicated that the men had been arrested for “imitating women”. According to the police report, the eight men “confessed that they are homosexuals” during police interrogations, at which they had no legal representation, but these confessions were subsequently refuted during the trial.

Eight of those arrested were subsequently convicted and sentenced to two years’ imprisonment for ‘indecency’ and ‘inciting debauchery’ under Articles 264 and 306 of the Penal Code respectively. One woman received a one-year suspended sentence for participating in ‘inciting debauchery’ by being present at the event. The restaurant owner was acquitted.

[Related articles from Erasing 76 Crimes: Mauritania: Police arrest 10 after seeing video of ‘gay wedding’  (January 31, 2020) and Mauritania: Prison for 8 men ‘imitating women’ at party (February 7, 2020)]

The U.S. Department of State evaluated LGBT rights in Mauritania in 2022:
The US Department of State found that LGBT persons are reportedly harassed and subjected to violence from the National Police, the General Group for Road Safety, neighbours, and family members. No laws protect LGBT persons from discrimination based on sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, or sex characteristics. LGBT identity is rarely publicly identified or discussed, which observers attributed to the severity of the stigma and the legal penalties attached to it.

0

Judges in this state aren’t required to perform same-sex marriages, top state court rules

Read more at ABA Journal.

Texas judges can decline to perform same-sex weddings because of their “sincerely held religious belief” and not be in violation of the rules on judicial impartiality, according to the Texas Supreme Court.

A lawsuit is being brought by Judge Brian Keith Umphress in Jack County, Texas, against the Texas State Commission on Judicial Conduct. In November 2019, the commission issued a “public warning” to Dianne Hensley, a justice of the peace who recused herself from officiating at same-sex weddings, according to coverage by Legal Newsline.

Umphress later sued the commission’s members, citing that a judge’s refusal to officiate only same-sex unions could result in sanctions by the commission and violate his federal constitutional rights.

He is seeking declaratory and injunctive relief to restrain the commission from punishing judges for not performing same-sex marriage ceremonies, for either religious or secular reasons.

0

Top LGBTQ+ friendly countries in 2026

Read more at QNotes Carolinas.

For LGBTQ+ people, safety has never been an abstract idea. Concerns for our community show up in legislation, healthcare and how the government treats its citizens. In the United States, where LGBTQ+ rights are being rolled back at both the state and federal level following President Donald Trump’s reelection, many people are quietly asking the same question: where, if anywhere, does stability still exist, and what does real safety actually look like?

That question shapes real decisions. Not just about travel, but about long-term plans, family, work, medical care  and whether it is possible to build a future without constant political uncertainty. International data from organizations including ILGA-Europe and Equaldex, alongside migration analysis and residency reporting from Get Golden Visa, points to a widening global divide. Some countries are strengthening legal protections and expanding access to care. Others are narrowing definitions of who is protected under the law, often by targeting transgender people first and testing how much rollback the public will tolerate.

The countries highlighted here represent a snapshot of places that currently offer strong legal protections and relative social stability for LGBTQ+ people. This is by no means an exhaustive list, and conditions can change quickly as governments shift and political climates evolve. Still, these examples help illustrate what safety looks like when it is embedded into legal systems, healthcare infrastructure, and public accountability, rather than left to cultural goodwill or temporary leadership.

One country that consistently ranks at the top is Malta. It has held the number one position on ILGA-Europe’s Rainbow Index for multiple consecutive years, a reflection of both legal protections and enforcement. Same-sex marriage has been legal since 2017, conversion therapy is banned nationwide, and gender identity is explicitly protected under the constitution. Legal gender recognition is based on self-determination, without medical or psychiatric requirements, and those protections extend into healthcare, employment, education, and family law, creating long-term security rather than symbolic inclusion.

Iceland also continues to stand out for both legal protections and social acceptance. Same-sex marriage has been legal since 2010, non-binary gender markers are recognized, and gender-affirming care is available through the public healthcare system. Comprehensive anti-discrimination laws are paired with high levels of public trust in institutions, which means LGBTQ+ protections are not constantly relitigated or politicized, but treated as settled rights reflected in daily life.

.Finland has taken meaningful steps in recent years, particularly for transgender people. A 2023 update to its law allows transgender adults to change their gender through self-determination, removing medical gatekeeping that had long been criticized by advocacy groups. While non-binary recognition remains limited, Finland’s strong social safety net and political consensus around equality have kept LGBTQ+ rights largely outside culture war framing, offering stability rather than constant legal vulnerability.

Spain has long been viewed as one of Europe’s most LGBTQ+-affirming countries, and recent legislation has reinforced that reputation. Same-sex marriage has been legal since 2005, and a 2023 gender self-identification law allows people to change legal gender without medical or psychological evaluations. Conversion therapy is banned, and public opinion surveys consistently show strong support for LGBTQ+ equality, particularly in major cities where protections are paired with visible community infrastructure.

In North America, Canada has become a focal point for LGBTQ+ Americans seeking stability. Same-sex marriage has been legal since 2005, non-binary gender markers are available on federal identification, and conversion therapy was banned nationwide in 2022. Advocacy organizations and international reporting have documented a rise in inquiries from U.S. LGBTQ+ residents since the 2024 election, especially among transgender people weighing whether legal protections at home will continue to erode.

The Netherlands remains one of the most legally secure environments for LGBTQ+ people. As the first country to legalize same-sex marriage, it continues to offer robust anti-discrimination protections and publicly funded gender-affirming healthcare. For some U.S. citizens, the Dutch-American Friendship Treaty has made relocation more feasible, a trend that has accelerated since the 2024 US presidential election.

None of these countries are immune to political change, and none represent a perfect solution. But in 2026, they show what becomes possible when LGBTQ+ safety is treated as a structural commitment rather than a cultural preference. As rights erode in some places, the countries that choose to protect them are defining where dignity, stability, and the possibility of a future still exist.

0

LGBTQ rights update: 2025 tally and 2026 preview

Read more at Erasing 76 Crimes.

Criminalization of gay sex — 2025 tally and 2026 preview

Criminalized Sodomy: Burkina Faso, Trinidad & Tobago

Decriminalized Sodomy: St. Lucia, Niue (reported in 2025; it happened in 2024).

Decriminalized Sodomy in Armed Forces: Dominican Republic

Repeal of Sodomy Laws Proposed: Guyana, Sri Lanka; Massachusetts (USA)

Court Challenges Pending: Grenada, Trinidad & Tobago, Zambia, possibly also St Vincent & the Grenadines and Jamaica

Criminalization Proposed: Niger

The net change in the number of criminalizing states was zero, thanks to losing two states as we gained two others, keeping the total at 65. The same thing happened in 2024, when Mali and Iraq criminalized sodomy while Namibia and Dominica decriminalized it. The number of criminalizing states hasn’t dropped since 2023, when Cook Islands and Mauritius decriminalized. And in fact, prior to 2024, no state had made sodomy a crime since 2019.

It should also be noted that the four states that criminalized sodomy in 2024-25 are all internationally recognized sovereign states with large populations, while the four decriminalizing states include three microstates, two of which aren’t sovereign.

Looking ahead to 2026, we can probably expect the criminalization wave across West Africa to continue into Niger, and possibly some other former French colonies in the area. As for decriminalization, our most likely candidates are Guyana, whose president vowed to decriminalize during last fall’s elections, and Grenada, the last of five Caribbean countries where a constitutional challenge was pending before the local courts. We may see a court challenge go ahead in Zambia this year as well, though the timeline is not currently clear. We’re also unlikely to get a result on the Privy Council appeal of Trinidad & Tobago’s sodomy law until 2027 or later. It also appears that efforts to get decriminalization passed in Sri Lanka have stalled.

Recognition of same-sex unions — 2025 tally and 2026 preview

Equal Marriage Brought into Effect: Liechtenstein, Thailand (both passed in 2024)

Equal Marriage codified: Guanajuato (Mexico)

Codification of Equal Marriage Proposed: Brazil; Virginia, Ohio, Oregon, Missouri (USA, by referendum); Aguascalientes, Chihuahua (Mexico)

Constitutional Ban on Same-Sex Marriage: Gabon (passed 2024)

Criminalized Same-Sex Marriage: Burkina Faso

Constitutional Ban on Gay People Adopting: Slovakia

Civil Unions: Lithuania (court ruling, legislation pending), Okinawa (Japan)

Civil Unions Enhanced: Czechia (passed in 2024)

Limited Recognition of Same-Sex Unions: Suriname, Turks & Caicos Islands (UK), Japan, India, European Union (court ruling affecting Poland, Bulgaria, Slovakia, Romania, yet to be implemented)

Court Challenges for Equal Marriage Pending: Japan, Botswana

Civil Union Bill Pending: Poland, Lithuania, Nagasaki (Japan)

Same-Sex Adoption Legalized: Guanajuato (Mexico – Codified), Czechia (stepchild only; passed in 2024), Thailand (passed in 2024)

Ended Discrimination against Same-Sex Couples in Adoption: Luxembourg, Israel, Chile

Surrogacy Legalized: Western Australia

Despite the number of developments listed above, we’ve entered a period where advances in same-sex marriage rights have slowed down, and we should be upfront about that going into 2026. We didn’t win same-sex marriage anywhere, and courts and governments only granted limited civil unions or relationship recognition for a specific limited rights in a handful of jurisdictions.

2026 doesn’t appear to offer much hope for advances, either. A supreme court case in Japan could go either way – or could even find that banning same-sex marriage is unconstitutional but order no solution. Sint Maarten (Netherlands) appears to just be waiting for a court challenge to copy the successful challenge in its partner states Aruba and Curacao in 2024, but none has been filed as far as I can see. And no other states in Europe or Latin America appear open to it now, with one asterisk.

At time of writing, the US military has imposed a regime change in Venezuela, removing its sitting president/dictator Nicolas Maduro to stand trial in New York. Who knows who’ll be running Venezuela by the end of 2026? Trump has ruled out the opposition leader who won a Nobel Peace Prize last year, and he insists that the US will be running the country somehow. Meanwhile, Maduro’s vice president has assumed the presidency with the support of Maduro’s supreme court. It’s easy to imagine a democratic Venezuela that is more amenable to LGBT rights than Maduro – there have been intermittent discussions about it in government since 2009. But it’s also easy to imagine that a US-imposed leader may not be keen to advance LGBT rights while dependent on Trump’s support, or another despot taking over in the event of a power vacuum.

Various countries in Africa and in parts of the Muslim world have proposed bills that would impose criminal sanctions on same-sex marriage, including Ghana and Niger. We’ll have to watch out for these.

Poland’s government agreed to a weak civil union bill in the last week of December, but it remains to be seen if even that will survive a threatened presidential veto. And Lithuania’s government has been lukewarm to codifying civil unions into law after the 2025 court ruling made them possible.

Discrimination, hate crime, and conversion therapy protections — 2025 tally and 2026 preview

Sexual Orientation Discrimination Banned: Dominican Republic (court ruling), Aklan (Philippines), Karnataka (India)

Gender Expression Discrimination Banned: Manitoba (Canada), Aklan (Philippines), Karnataka (India)

Gender Identity Discrimination Ban Ordered by Court: Kenya

Discrimination Protections Removed: USA (Trump executive order); Iowa (gender identity protections repealed); UK (supreme court ruled trans women aren’t women under equality law)

SOGIE Discrimination Bans Proposed: Ukraine, Montenegro; Castille & Leon and Asturias (Spain)

Constitutional Ban on SOGIE Discrimination Proposed: Oregon, Ohio, Missouri, Vermont, Connecticut (USA, by referendum)

Conversion Therapy Banned: Spain (penalties enhanced); South Australia & New South Wales (passed 2024); Chiapas, Tamaulipas, Durango, San Luis Potosi & Guanajuato (Mexico, banned federally since 2024); Quezon City (Philippines); New South Wales, South Australia (Australia, both passed in 2024)

Conversion Therapy Bans Proposed/Pending: UK, Ireland, Netherlands, Luxembourg, Austria, Switzerland, Colombia; Tasmania, Western Australia (Australia); Gibraltar (UK)

LGBTQ Hate Crime Laws: Australia (Nationwide) and Victoria and Tasmania; Karnataka (India)

Hate Crime Law Proposed: Mexico

Hate Crime Law Enhancements Proposed: Canada, Argentina, Ukraine, Romania, UK

Blood Donation Ban Ends: Australia

Blood Donation Ban Reinstated: Greece

Once again, we saw very limited gains in 2025 across these fields, though there were some milestones. The court finding that sexual orientation discrimination is banned under the Dominican Republic constitution is a major development that will likely have ripple effects going forward. And the developments across Australia have been positive even if they were mostly traced to last year.

Looking ahead to 2026, we’re probably heading into another bad year in the United States, which will likely only be mitigated or reversed if Democrats pull off major electoral victories in mid-term and state legislative elections in November. But the supreme court also looks likely to strike down all conversion therapy ban laws across the country during this session too.

Prospects look a little bit brighter in Europe, where applicant EU countries are all racing to shore up their LGBTQ human rights standards and discrimination rules as part of the accession negotiation process. I think the European countries with proposed conversion therapy bans also seem likely to actually pass them this year – maybe the Australian states too.

Freedom of expression and assembly — 2025 tally and 2026 preview

New Laws Banning LGBTQ Expression/Pride Events Passed: Hungary, Kazakhstan (signed in 2026), Burkina Faso

Laws Banning LGBTQ Expression/Assembly Proposed: Turkiye, Ghana, Senegal, Niger

These laws, modeled after the “LGBT Propaganda” laws passed by Russia back in 2013 and Uganda’s “Anti-Homosexuality Act” from 2024, have been multiplying in recent years in countries in Russia’s orbit and across Africa. The EU is doing work to push back against such laws, but with limited success.

Hungary will hold elections in the spring, which will present the best chance to get a less hostile government in power — and hopefully they can reverse the worst anti-LGBT and anti-democratic actions of the Orban regime.

Trans-specific issues — 2025 tally and 2026 preview

Gender Recognition Law Passed: Cuba; Veracruz (Mexico); New South Wales, ACT (Australia, passed in 2024)

Gender Recognition Made Easier: Czechia (surgical requirement ended); Poland (administrative process); Tabasco (Mexico, administrative process)

Gender Recognition Law Proposed: Costa Rica, Montenegro

Non-binary Gender Recognition Passed: Brazil (limited court order); Mexico City (Mexico)

Non-binary Gender Recognition Proposed: Luxembourg

Legal Gender Change Banned: Slovakia, Peru

Gender Care Banned/Restricted: USA (Supreme Court decision upholding bans in 27 states); Brazil; Sweden (passed 2024); New Zealand; Queensland (Australia)

Gender Care Ban/Restrictions Proposed: Turkiye; Argentina; Colorado, Missouri (USA, referendum pending)

Trans People Banned from Military: USA

Trans Sports Ban Proposed: Colorado, Washington (USA, referendum pending)

Transfemicide Laws Passed: Nayarit, Mexico City, Baja California, Baja California Sur, Campeche, and Mexico (Mexico)

Trans people made some substantial gains in 2025, particularly in Mexico, but also suffered some huge setbacks as a global anti-trans movement increasingly found its footing with right-wing governments. In particular, anti-trans activists have found success pushing bans on gender care for minors, but the agenda is clear that they want to expand this to all gender care and legal gender recognition cases.

Looking ahead to 2026, I think Mexico and the EU and its applicants are the likeliest states to see positive developments, though the anti-trans movement in Europe has been strong too. Unfortunately, I don’t think we’re going to see a change in the trajectory of the USA on these issues unless Democrats win big in November.

0

GOP lawmakers in Utah to “permanently” ban gender-affirming care even after their own report supported it

Read more at LGBTQ Nation.

Utah House Speaker Mike Schultz (R) says his Republican majority intends to permanently ban gender-affirming care for minors this year. The move comes more than seven months after the release of a Utah Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) report, mandated by a Republican-backed state law, which found that medical evidence actually supports access to gender-affirming healthcare for minors, a different result than many conservatives were hoping for.

Utah already has what former state Rep. Mike Kennedy (R) — who now represents the state’s third district in Congress — described to Deseret News as a “permanent” ban on gender-affirming care for minors. Passed in January 2023, S.B. 16 banned gender-affirming surgeries for minors — despite such surgeries being exceptionally rare — and instituted an indefinite moratorium on providing puberty blockers and hormone replacement therapy (HRT) to minors for the purposes of gender-affirming care.

Kennedy, who co-sponsored S.B. 16, admitted to Deseret News that characterizing the law’s ban on puberty blockers and HRT as a “moratorium” was essentially a tactic to win over lawmakers who wanted more data on the effects of such treatments. The ban, he said, is already effectively permanent unless Utah lawmakers act to lift it.

S.B. 16 also ordered the state DHHS to commission a review of medical evidence around puberty blockers and HRT prescribed for the treatment of gender dysphoria in minors, with the goal of lawmakers using the report’s findings to inform future policy decisions.

That review, conducted by the University of Utah’s Drug Regimen Center, was released last May, and as Mother Jones reported at the time, its conclusions “unambiguously” supported the benefits of gender-affirming care for trans young people.

However, Utah Republicans, including Schultz, Kennedy, and state Rep. Katy Hall — who co-sponsored S.B. 16 — have dismissed the report.

“Common sense is common sense,” Schultz told Deseret News. “I don’t need a report, one way or the other, to tell me that. I just firmly believe that minors should not be transitioning.”

At the same time, however, Schultz told the outlet that he agrees with a separate review of the DHHS report by anti-trans advocacy group Do No Harm. The group’s review, published early last month, claims that the DHHS report does not meet the standards of a true systematic review of medical evidence, according to Deseret News.

“Unlike true systematic reviews, it does not assess the reliability of studies and whether the research can provide guidance for weighing the risks and benefits of medical intervention for children with gender dysphoria,” Do No Harm’s report claims.

Deseret News — which is owned, through a subsidiary, by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints — also notes that the Utah DHHS review’s findings contradict those in both the Cass Review and one released by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services last year. Both of those reviews have been widely criticized.

A spokesperson for University of Utah Health defended the Utah DHHS review, telling Deseret News in a statement that it was based on “an extensive body of research regarding the safety and efficacy of these treatments.”

“Our review also found that the consensus of that evidence is that the treatments are safe in terms of changes to bone density, cardiovascular risk factors, and metabolic changes; and they are effective in terms of positive mental health and psychosocial outcomes,” the statement read, according to Deseret News.

0

Two ballot initiatives gathering signatures target transgender kids in Colorado

Read more at Colorado Newsline.

A Colorado organization is leading two ballot measures that would restrict rights for transgender children in the state. 

Protect Kids Colorado, a coalition led by prominent anti-LGBTQ activist Erin Lee, is gathering signatures for ballot measures that would prevent transgender children from participating in school sports and receiving gender-affirming surgeries. Lee led several anti-LGBTQ initiatives that the Colorado Title Board rejected ahead of the 2024 election. 

The group has until Feb. 20 to submit 124,238 valid signatures from registered voters for each initiative to the Colorado secretary of state’s office. If that threshold is met, the measures would be placed on the November 2026 ballot. 

Z Williams, co-director of the Denver nonprofit Bread and Roses Legal Center, said both of the issues the ballot measures seek to address are relatively minute. Williams said they have yet to see “actual validated science” that supports the need for the initiatives. 

“The number of trans athletes is incredibly small, and the number of gender-affirming surgeries done for transgender youth or minors is even smaller,” Williams said. “We have two ballot measures … that are going to require hundreds of thousands of dollars, waste a lot of time, create a lot of confusion during the election over two pretty much manufactured issues.”

Protect Kids Colorado did not respond to Newsline’s request for comment on the initiatives.

Coloradans value freedom, a freedom that belongs to everyone, including transgender youth and their families.

– Cal Solverson, spokesperson for One Colorado

There isn’t clear data on the number of transgender student athletes in Colorado, and the two major hospitals that provide gender-affirming care to minors do not offer surgeries to minors.

Cal Solverson, spokesperson for LGBTQ+ advocacy organization One Colorado, said the ballot measures are ill-informed and jeopardize individual freedom. They also put transgender people, their families and health care providers across the state at risk, Solverson said. 

“Coloradans value freedom, a freedom that belongs to everyone, including transgender youth and their families,” Solverson said in a statement. “The right to exist as we are extends beyond the exam room to the playing field, where every child deserves the opportunity to stay active, develop life skills, and experience the deep camaraderie of a team.”

If the measures make it to the ballot, Solverson said One Colorado trusts that Colorado voters will defend transgender youth and “ensure that freedom continues to exist for all Coloradans and not just some.”

Prohibit certain surgeries on minors

Ballot Initiative 110 would prohibit health care professionals from knowingly performing any surgery on a minor “for the purpose of altering biological sex characteristics.” 

The measure would also prohibit state and federal funding including Medicaid from being used to pay for gender-affirming procedures.  

Children’s Hospital Colorado and Denver Health have paused gender-affirming care for youth amid the Trump administration’s threats to pull Medicaid and Medicare funding entirely.   

A document on Protect Kids Colorado’s website says that Children’s Hospital Colorado performs gender-affirming surgeries on minors, but Children’s Hospital said in a statement that it has never provided gender-affirming surgical care to patients under 18, and it stopped offering such surgeries to adults in 2023. Denver Health stopped offering surgeries to minors in early 2025.

The document also says that while the ballot measure only targets gender-affirming surgeries, the organizations has “a multi-pronged plan to outlaw puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones for minors as well.”

The language in the initiative includes medical terms that aren’t necessarily related to surgery, such as prescriptions. It also applies to health care professionals such as podiatrists, dentists and chiropractors, who wouldn’t be performing gender-affirming surgeries in the first place. That adds concern about how the measure would affect other elements of gender-affirming care, according to Mardi Moore, CEO of LGBTQ+ advocacy group Rocky Mountain Equality. 

“It’s kind of like they’re throwing the spaghetti at the wall to see what’s going to stick,” Moore said. “There’s not a lot of people you can trust anymore, and I think Protect Kids Colorado is one of those groups that cannot be trusted to think they will keep all children safe.”

If the measure passes, it would lead to discriminatory practices in medical care, affecting all children, not just transgender children, Moore said. 

Male and female participation in school sports

Ballot Initiative 109 would create definitions in state statute aiming to define boys and girls based on physical anatomy, excluding transgender people. 

Sports teams sponsored by schools or athletic associations would be required to expressly designate those teams as for men, women or co-ed. Schools and their athletic departments would be required to adopt policies implementing the requirements of the initiative.

The measure would not affect any student’s ability to participate in co-ed sports. 

The state’s commissioner of education would be tasked with enforcing the measure, and would have discretion to determine how to “take appropriate remedial action” against any school not in compliance with its requirements. 

“It would mean a little 8-year-old who loves to play soccer and who happens to be trans couldn’t play anymore,” Moore said of Initiative 109. 

Colorado is known to be a safe place for LGBTQ+ people, Williams said, and families have moved to the state from around the country because they share those values. 

“When I was a kid, we were ‘the hate state,’ and Colorado has unequivocally disavowed that stance,” Williams said. “So I think we need to remember that these are folks that are trying to use a very marginalized community to rebuild a political ideology that’s been rejected for a very long time here.” 

Protect Kids Colorado is running a third ballot measure to increase penalties for people convicted of human trafficking of a minor. 

0

Over 100 detained in brutal police raid on LGBTQ+ nightclub in Azerbaijan

Read more at LGBTQ Nation.

International LGBTQ+ rights advocates are calling for an investigation following a brutal police raid on an LGBTQ+ friendly venue in Azerbaijan’s capital, Baku, late last month.

According to Azerbaijani LGBTQ+ outlet Qıy Vaar!, which first reported on the raid, police detained around 106 people at Baku’s Labyrinth nightclub. Those detained were reportedly forced to remain outside in freezing temperatures for over 12 hours without warm clothing, water, or access to bathrooms.

In a December 29 Instagram post, international LGBTQ+ advocacy organization ILGA-Europe reported that police arrived at the venue in buses and detained people in large groups.

Kiy Vaara, who was reportedly among those detained, described the experience as “traumatic” according to Pink News.

“When I close my eyes, I remember the faces of the police like a nightmare,” Vaara said. “Even though I begged to go to the toilet several times, they wouldn’t let me in. In that cold, without a jacket, I peed on my pants, and the urine froze on me.”

Detainees were later taken to the Nasimi District Police Department, according to Pink News. ILGA-Europe reports that detainees were photographed and fingerprinted, and authorities collected personal data. Detainees also reported physical violence and threats of extortion from police who reportedly demanded bribes in exchange for release and pressured detainees to testify against each other. ILGA-Europe also reported one case of sexual violence.

It’s unclear why authorities raided the club, or why they detained its patrons. As Pink News notes, homosexuality has been legal in Azerbaijan since 2000. However, ILGA-Europe ranks the country second to last among 49 European countries for its legal and policy practices regarding LGBTQ+ rights. The only country with a worse ranking is Russia.

Both Qıy Vaar! and ILGA-Europe released statements denouncing the raid.

“We know the perpetrators. The system that has ignored our rights for years, that does not prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity in the legislation, that has ousted the LGBTQ+ community from their places and forced them into invisibility, is the main culprit of this violence,” an English translation of Qıy Vaar’s statement reads, according to Pink News. “The Ministry of Internal Affairs must conduct an urgent, independent and transparent investigation into the allegations of violence, degrading treatment, arbitrary detention, bribery, sexual violence and torture against 106 people detained at the Nasimi District Police Department.”

ILGA-Europe’s statement, shared on Instagram, expressed the group’s deep concern over the raid.

“We stand in solidarity with the LGBTI community in Azerbaijan and support our member organisation in Azerbaijan, Qiy Vaar’s call for an urgent investigation and a public statement by the authorities,” the statement read. “Human rights and dignity must be upheld for everyone in Azerbaijan.”

0

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑