A federal judge on Tuesday blocked President Donald Trump’s administration from refusing to issue passports to transgender and nonbinary Americans nationwide that reflect their gender identities.
U.S. District Judge Julia Kobick in Boston expanded, opens new tab a preliminary injunction she issued in April that allowed six transgender and nonbinary individuals who challenged the policy to obtain passports consistent with their gender identities or with an “X” sex designation while the lawsuit moves forward.
Kobick did so after concluding the policy the U.S. Department of State adopted pursuant to an executive order Trump signed likely discriminated on the basis of sex and was rooted in an irrational prejudice toward transgender Americans that violated the U.S. Constitution’s Fifth Amendment.
While Kobick’s April ruling was limited in its scope, the judge, an appointee of Democratic President Joe Biden, on Tuesday granted the case class action status and halted the policy’s enforcement against transgender, nonbinary and intersex passport holders.
Kobick said granting class action status to two categories of passport holders was appropriate given that the administration’s actions affected them uniformly “by preventing them from obtaining passports with a sex marker consistent with their gender identity.”
Li Nowlin-Sohl, a lawyer for the plaintiffs at the American Civil Liberties Union, called the ruling “a critical victory against discrimination and for equal justice under the law.”
White House spokeswoman Anna Kelly in a statement called the decision “yet another attempt by a rogue judge to thwart President Trump’s agenda and push radical gender ideology that defies biological truth.”
The case is one of several concerning an executive order Trump signed after returning to office on January 20 directing the government to recognize only two biologically distinct sexes, male and female.
The order also directed the State Department to change its policies to only issue passports that “accurately reflect the holder’s sex.”
The State Department subsequently changed its passport policy to “request the applicant’s biological sex at birth,” rather than permit applicants to self-identify their sex, and to only allow them to be listed as male or female.
Prior to Trump, the State Department for more than three decades allowed people to update the sex designation on their passports.
In 2022, the Biden administration allowed passport applicants to choose “X” as a neutral sex marker on their passport applications, as well as being able to self-select “M” or “F” for male or female.
The Trevor Project received official notice yesterday that the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) is initiating the closure of the 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline’s LGBTQ+ Youth Specialized Services program within 30 days, effective July 17, 2025.
Jaymes Black, CEO of The Trevor Project, released the following statement in response:
“We received official notice that the Trump administration has ordered the closure of The 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline’s LGBTQ+ Youth Specialized Services program, effective July 17, 2025. This means that, in 30 short days, this program that has provided life-saving services to more than 1.3 million LGBTQ+ young people will no longer be available for those who need it.
“This is devastating, to say the least. Suicide prevention is about people, not politics. The administration’s decision to remove a bipartisan, evidence-based service that has effectively supported a high-risk group of young people through their darkest moments is incomprehensible. The fact that this news comes to us halfway through Pride Month is callous – as is the administration’s choice to remove the ‘T’ from the acronym ‘LGBTQ+’ in their announcement. Transgender people can never, and will never, be erased.
“Congress can still act to reverse this fatal decision. We are asking everyone to join the overwhelming public support for evidence-based crisis services, and urge Congress to act. Learn more by visiting TheTrevorProject.org/ActNow.
“I want every LGBTQ+ young person to know that you are worthy, you are loved, and you belong – despite this heartbreaking news. The Trevor Project’s crisis counselors are here for you 24/7, just as we always have been, to help you navigate anything you might be feeling right now.”
In September 2022, The Trevor Project began providing its best-practice crisis services to LGBTQ+ youth through the 988 Lifeline. When individuals contact the 988 via phone, text, or chat, they are given the option to “press 3” or “reply PRIDE” to be connected with counselors trained specifically to assist LGBTQ+ contacts up to age 25. Initially, The Trevor Project served as the sole provider for the pilot phase of 988 LGBTQ+ youth specialized services, before transitioning to serve as one of seven centers that currently make up the LGBTQ+ Youth Subnetwork.
The Trevor Project serves nearly 50% of the LGBTQ+ youth specialized services’ contact volume. In 2024 alone, The Trevor Project directly servedmore than 231,000 crisis contacts, and trained and supported nearly 250 crisis counselors and operational support staff to support the 988 Lifeline. Previously, the LGBTQ+ Youth Subnetwork received up to $50 million in restricted federal funds to provide these life-saving services.
The Trevor Project’s supporters in the House and Senate advocated for the continued funding for these life-saving programs. The organization launched a petition to demand lawmakers protect LGBTQ+ youth and an Emergency Lifeline fundraising campaign. On June 2, 2025, more than 100 entertainment icons – across film, music, TV, sports, theater, comedy, fashion, culinary arts, and book publishing – joined The Trevor Project’s sign-on letter to protect federal funding for LGBTQ+ youth suicide prevention.
If you or someone you know needs help or support, The Trevor Project’s trained crisis counselors are available 24/7 at 1-866-488-7386, via chat at TheTrevorProject.org/Get-Help, or by texting START to 678678.
The Trump administration is using its anti-trans actions to try to dismantle civil rights for both trans and cis women alike – and it’s taking an unusual route to do so.
The Department of Energy (DOE) is seeking to rescind the section of Title IX that says schools must allow students to play on sports teams with the opposite sex if there is no team for their sex available (unless the sport is a contact sport). The rule has allowed girls to play on boys’ teams in schools that don’t offer an equivalent girls’ team.
The DOE claims the policy “ignore[s] differences between the sexes which are grounded in fundamental and incontrovertible reality” and says eliminating it aligns with Donald Trump’s anti-trans executive order, “Keeping Men Out of Women’s Sports.”
The rescission of the rule would only apply to schools that receive funding from the DOE, which provides money to some schools for research and other programs, such as its Renew America’s School grant to assist with energy upgrades.
What’s more, the administration is exploiting a loophole to try to rush the rule change through without the standard 60-day public comment period. The DOE is using a process called a direct final rule (DFR), which does not require the formal rulemaking process but is typically used for simple changes, such as form updates.
The DFR process allowed the rule change to take effect on July 15 unless “significant adverse comments” had been submitted by June 16. Thousands of comments were submitted, though they are not visible to the public. It’s not clear whether the rule will officially take effect.
If the rule does change, it will not only affect trans athletes. Schools that receive DOE funding will no longer be required to allow cisgender girls to play on boys’ teams when a girls’ team does not exist.
Shiwali Patel, senior director of safe and inclusive schools for the National Women’s Law Center, told K-12 Divethe change is “blatant sexism, and harmful to women and girls.”
″The Trump administration is trying to gut long-standing Title IX protections that intend to provide women and girls with more opportunities to play sports, and without following the legally required rulemaking process, no less.”
Patel added that the administration clearly “doesn’t actually care about ‘protecting’ women and girls,” as it has used this claim to justify its crusade against trans rights, especially when it comes to trans student-athletes.
Julia Martin, director of policy and government affairs at legal and consulting group The Bruman Group, explained that the administration was able to keep the proposed rule change under wraps for so long because no one would have expected it to come from the DOE, as the Department of Education typically handles these kinds of policies.
The proposed change, in fact, was slipped into the middle of a list of 47 so-called “burdensome and costly regulations” outlined in a DOE press release in May announcing the department’s plan for a major overhaul to puportedly “save the American people an estimated $11 billion and cut more than 125,000 words fro the Code of Federal Regulations.”
“Part of what I see happening is this sense of overwhelm,” Kel O’Hara, senior attorney for policy and education equity at Equal Rights Advocates, told HuffPost. “There’s so much happening that it’s hard to follow. [The Trump administration] is trying to put these things through back doors, which makes it hard for the people who normally keep an eye on these things to catch it.”
O’Hara said the administration’s use of the DFR process is also worrisome for the future of other civil rights protections. “The really concerning part from my perspective is that this could essentially provide a blueprint for dismantling civil rights protections across the board.”
A second proposed rule change also seeks to rescind similar Title IX protections for education programs. The administration is also using the DFR loophole to try to push this change through on the same timeline.
Exactly one year after opening its doors, The Pryde has transformed the historic 1902 structure into New England’s first LGBTQ+ welcoming affordable senior housing community.
Karmen Cheung, Pennrose New England Regional VP, recalled the building’s previous state.
“I remember walking in and doing a tour of the building when it was vacant for the first time,” Cheung said. “It was actually kind of creepy, cold, dark.”
The vision, however, was clear: to turn an historic building into an independent living space where LGBTQ+ seniors could feel a strong sense of belonging. The result is a vibrant community that residents like Brian Salvaggio deeply appreciate.
“It’s bright, it’s open, it’s lively,” Salvaggio said. “It’s really the first group of people that’s lived here, so you feel part of something.”
For many residents, The Pryde offers a much-needed haven.
“As we get older and we want more community around us and we want more support around us, that’s really what brought us here,” resident Pat Xavier said.
The 100% accessible building addresses a critical need for a generation of LGBTQ+ elders who grew up without the legal protections and societal acceptance now afforded to younger generations, according to Gretchen Van Ness, executive director of LGBTQ Senior Housing.
“This generation of LGBTQ elders has faced such losses that they come into their elder years with a much smaller safety net than a lot of other folks are lucky to have,” Van Ness said.
The journey to create The Pryde was a dedicated nine-and-a-half-year collaboration between LGBTQ Senior Housing and Pennrose Management. Throughout the renovation, developers diligently preserved the building’s historic charm, retaining elements like original chalkboards and bell systems.
“Every unit is actually a little different because of those historic pieces,” Cheung said.
The Pryde is open to anyone over 62 who qualifies for affordable housing, though demand has far outstripped availability.
“We are 100% occupied,” Van Ness said. “This community is full and it’s hopping and there’s a million things going on.”
For residents, the most significant impact is the feeling of safety and liberation from discrimination and isolation.
“That’s just a wonderful feeling because, you know, there’s no more hiding,” Brian Salvaggio said. “Not at our age. We want to be who we are and enjoy the time we have.”
After a year of operation, residents and representatives alike believe The Pryde stands as a powerful blueprint for LGBTQ+ senior living communities everywhere, demonstrating how inclusive spaces can transform lives.
An East Side San Antonio council district will make history again with its incoming, temporary council member.
City Council voted 10-0 to select Leo Castillo, a social media and marketing manager for Thrive Youth Center, to serve as the interim District 2 council member while Councilman Jalen McKee-Rodriguez is out on his upcoming parental leave.
McKee-Rodriguez, who was the first openly gay man elected to the San Antonio City Council, believes Castillo will be the first openly transgender man to serve as a public official in Texas.
At least two transgender women have held public office in Texas before: former New Hope Mayor Jess Herbst and former Judge Phyllis Frye.
“Today is a huge win for our community and another reason to celebrate Pride Month,” McKee-Rodriguez said during the council meeting on Thursday. “At a time when our community is under attack, especially the trans community, this is going to be a — this was a historic vote.”
“I think this just definitely highlights the fact that, you know, trans people are people, and we deserve every opportunity like anybody else,” Castillo told reporters afterward. “And so I’m just really excited to sit with that and celebrate that with my community.”
Castillo was sworn in after Thursday’s vote but will not officially take the seat until Aug. 1. McKee-Rodriguez is expected to return to the council by the end of September.
Castillo and McKee-Rodriguez met at the University of Texas at San Antonio almost nine years ago, and Castillo has been a political volunteer for McKee-Rodriguez.
“It’s just been really incredible just following Jalen along on his journey. And so I thought, ‘you know what, I think I’d be the best person to step up,’” he said.
McKee-Rodriguez said it “just so happens” that Castillo is a member of the LGBTQ+ community
“Leo’s been a very strong member of our community,” McKee-Rodriguez said. “He’s been an advocate who’s organized around many of the same issues that I’ve organized around, including public safety reform, civic engagement, and LGBTQIA rights.”
No-fuss appointment
Though 12 other people applied for the position, including several who had run against McKee-Rodriguez in the past, Castillo cruised to his appointment.
After a first round of short interviews on Wednesday, the council could have chosen up to three finalists for further consideration. But after just 15 minutes of closed-door discussion, they tapped Castillo as the lone finalist.
Thursday’s interview process took roughly 10 minutes before the council officially appointed Castillo as the interim council member.
District 1 Councilwoman Sukh Kaur was away from her seat for the final vote, but she had supported his selection at Wednesday’s meeting.
Alicia Williams, McKee-Rodriguez’s director of constituent services, also told council members that the district staff preferred Castillo for the role, saying he had worked alongside the office “with consistency, humility, and deep care for the people of the district.”
These were the other applicants for the temporary position:
Ruben Arciniega — Certification specialist, ran for D2 council seat in 2019
Brian Benavidez — Owner of bike tour company
Joseph Bravo — Former chief of staff for former D7 Councilwoman Ana Sandoval
Dori Brown — Accountant, ran for D2 council seat in 2021
Chris Dawkins — President of marketing and advertising company, ran for D2 council seat in 2021
Eric Estrada — Nonprofit executive director
Anslem Gentle — Security consultant
Jennifer Martinez — Financial services executive
Stephen Parker — Retired, ran for city council in 1991
Rose Requenez-Hill — Retired, president of Government Hill Alliance, ran for D2 council seat in 2023 and 2025
Carla Sisco — IT business relationship manager, ran for D2 council seat in 2025
Kizzie Thomas — Educator, ran for D2 council seat in 2025
Decision to take leave
McKee-Rodriguez and his husband are expecting their first child, a baby girl, in July, during the council’s traditional recess.
Shortly after his re-election, McKee-Rodriguez announced he planned to take eight weeks of parental leave in August and September.
That falls during the hectic city budget process, when council members hammer out the details of the city’s multi-billion-dollar spending plan. McKee-Rodriguez has said he wants his district to have a voice if he can’t be there full-time.
“And so for me, it was most important that District 2 have a stable voice that was most aligned with mine and that they know that they can trust and rely on. And so… I’ve gotten a lot of positive feedback from that,” he told KSAT of his decision to take leave..
The situation appears to be unique in the city’s history.
“We are not aware of any previous temporary appointment to fill a seat during parental leave,” city spokesman Brian Chasnoff told KSAT after McKee-Rodriguez’s initial announcement.
The last time a council member temporarily vacated their seat was former District 10 Councilman Clayton Perry in the wake of a 2022 drunken hit-and-run crash.
Just over two weeks after Perry went on a leave of absence, the council chose former Councilman Mike Gallagher to fill in for him, following a similar selection process. Gallagher ended up serving six weeks before Perry returned to finish out his term.
The California legislature is expected to restore $40 million in the state budget for LGBTQ+ health programs that was cut by Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom.
Lawmakers are set to approve their revisions to the governor’s budget today, according to the Bay Area Reporter, which will restore funding for the California Department of Public Health’s Office of Health Equity (OHE). Newsom had eliminated the funds in his revised budget proposal released last month, drawing heavy condemnation from both lawmakers and LGBTQ+ groups.
The office funds several programs for LGBTQ+ youth, women, and transgender people through its Gender Health Equity Section (GHES), which is “dedicated to eliminating systemic bias that impacts health outcomes based on gender, gender identity, and sexual orientation.” In pausing funds, the governor also paused enrollment for undocumented adults in state healthcare programs.
The Los Angeles LGBT Center, which has been a recipient of some of the funds, including $1.9 million in 2022 for its Audre Lorde Health Program, sharply criticized Newsom’s proposed budget. CEO Joe Hollendoner said in a statement that the cuts were “a betrayal of queer and trans Californians.”
“Let’s be clear: balancing the state budget on the backs of vulnerable queer communities is a moral failure,” he said. “In cutting this funding, Governor Newsom has chosen to sacrifice the health and dignity of those already navigating intersecting barriers of misogyny, racism, transphobia, and xenophobia — including undocumented LGBTQ+ people. These cuts, along with the pausing of enrollment for adult undocumented Californians, are a clear attack on our healthcare system and the people who depend on it.”
The governor must still approve the legislature’s revisions to the state budget, which has has until June 30 to sign into law. Newsom, who is set to negotiate with lawmakers over the next few days, has not indicated whether or not he will agree to leave the funds.
Air Force veteran Gina Ortiz Jones has become the first out LGBTQ+ person elected as mayor of San Antonio, Texas. After beating conservative Rolando Pablos in a runoff election on Saturday, she will also become the third woman to hold the office.
“It was my name on the ballot,” she told supporters at a victory rally that night, “but you and I know decency was on the ballot, kindness was on the ballot, compassion was on the ballot, and San Antonio showed up and showed out.”
She added, “So I look forward to being a mayor for all.”
The win followed a contentious battle between Jones and Pablos, who is known for his close ties with anti-LGBTQ+ Texas Gov. Greg Abbott (R). Jones called Pablos “Abbott’s puppet” and Pablos accused her of using the name Ortiz to appeal to the city’s Latino majority even though she is Filipino-American.
In response, Ortiz called him “racist” and said she’s “proud of my identity.”
“As we think about what’s going on in this moment in time… [we] reminded folks what San Antonio stands for. We reminded them that our city is about compassion and it’s about leading with everybody in mind.”
Jones also brought Brandon, a transgender drill instructor in the United States Air Force, to the stage. She told the crowd he is being kicked out due to the president’s anti-trans executive orders.
“Leadership matters. Leaders do three things: They create opportunities, they protect opportunities, or they erase opportunities… It’s unfortunate that the United States Air Force is not going to benefit from your talents because of bigotry,” she told him.
“Our country, I think we’re going through a blip right now, but San Antonio has had the opportunity to say. you know what, we’re going to move past this.”
Jones ran under the slogan, “There is no time to waste.” A two-time candidate for Congress, Iraq War veteran, Defense Intelligence Agency analyst, and an Under Secretary of the Air Force in the Biden administration, she has certainly done a lot with hers.
She came out to family and friends at 15 and served as an Air Force captain in Iraq under Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. “I learned a long time ago, transparency leads to accountability, and accountability leads to trust,” she said.
Jones most recently served as Under Secretary of the Air Force, where she managed a $173 billion budget and led 600,000 people.
“That job came down to asking yourself two questions every single day,” she recently told LGBTQ Nation, “which is 1) Do my folks have what they need to be successful to do the nation’s work? And 2) Are we making smart investments? I think those are ultimately the questions that a mayor has to ask.”
Jones has voiced tackling poverty as a big priority, since almost 20 percent of San Antonio residents live below the poverty line – a number that has held steady since the 1980s.
A first-generation American, Jones grew up in San Antonio, and her mother is from the Philippines. She raised Jones and her sister as a single mother. They lived in subsidized housing and relied on reduced lunch programs.
In a 2020 interview with LGBTQ Nation, Jones emphasized that these programs were not handouts for her family, but rather critical investments in their future.
In the Air Force, she served as an intelligence officer. She has spent almost fifteen years working in national security, including serving as the Director for Investment at the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative under President Barack Obama.
“I’ve seen firsthand the importance of American leadership,” she also told LGBTQ Nation. “I know how important our example is in so many ways.” She emphasized “the importance of electing good, competent people that can lead in times of crisis and not cause them or exacerbate them.”
An unknown assailant in Washington D.C. attacked a gay man with a rock, causing him to bleed profusely. The victim suspects his attacker may be a young local teen who has yelled homophobic slurs in the past. Police are now investigating.
On Friday, around 12:30 p.m., Addam Schauer-Mayhew was seated on his couch watching tennis when his home camera recorded a masked individual walking up to he and his husband’s house — which was decorated in rainbows for Pride. The masked individual then threw a large rock through their living room window, hitting Schauer-Mayhew in the head.
“The rock that was thrown was about baseball size, and it was almost like a piece of concrete that had sharp, jagged edges,” the victim’s husband Bryan Schauer told WUSA, adding that he came downstairs when he heard his husband crying out in pain. Schauer said he saw broken glass and a lot of blood. “I can’t imagine how much it hurt.”
The couple had been preparing to attend the weekend WorldPride celebration. They suspect the attacker may have been a young local teen who shouted anti-gay slurs at them a year ago. They say the suspect wore an ankle monitor and was accompanied by a younger teen.
The men say the incident has left them afraid and are now asking for the public to help identify the attacker in the video. They’re also asking for the police to consider hate crime charges.
“I am proud of who I am. I’m proud to be a gay man, a queer man, living in the city that I love in. I’m just trying to be accepted.” Schauer-Mayhew said.
While largely avoiding the same level of heated pushback of years’ past, Texas lawmakers passed several bills that give LGBTQ+ people in Texas, specifically transgender residents, less opportunity to receive care and maintain their identities in state records.
Texas legislators filed over 100 anti-trans bills through the session, some containing provisions that have been shot down in years’ prior while others proposed new restrictions. Less than 10 were ultimately approved by lawmakers.
The new bills that are likely to be signed by Gov. Greg Abbott represent a yearslong movement from state conservatives to find new ways to restrict the presence of trans and LGBTQ+ Texans, advocates say. The bills that failed may also be resurrected by lawmakers in future sessions. Here’s what to know.
State definitions of man and woman
Several bills filed in the Legislature aimed to craft legal definitions of sex and gender in addition to their target goals — but House Bill 229 makes that goal its sole purpose, establishing state definitions for male and female and applying those definitions across statute.
HB 229 defines a woman as “an individual whose biological reproductive system is developed to produce ova,” and a man as “an individual whose biological reproductive system is developed to fertilize the ova of a female.”
Most immediately, the bill will bolster an already existing block from stateagencies on changes to gender markers on state documents, which was backed by a nonbinding opinion from Attorney General Ken Paxton in March. The bill may also force those who have already switched their documents to match their identified gender to have changes reverted when they are renewed.
The longer-term effects of HB 229 are still not immediately apparent, as references to man and woman are used hundreds of times in statute and may ripple into other laws affecting people’s lives. Texas joins 13 other states that have also crafted their own definitions, and several other bills that also passed in the state have individual definitions for related terms like “biological sex.”
President Donald Trump issued an executive order named “Defending Women From Gender Ideology Extremism” in January providing federal definitions of male and female. Similarly, HB 229 has been dubbed the “Women’s Bill of Rights” by supporters, claiming it protects women in the state from men invading their spaces.
Abbott released an executive order of his own shortly after Trump’s affirming the president’s directive, but did not provide his own definitions. In a May post on social media, the governor said he would immediately sign HB 229 into law.
New requirements for medical records and insurance coverage
Tightening the ability to change the gender on state records like drivers’ licenses has been a key issue for conservative lawmakers for years, and while HB 229 sets a precedent in disallowing new changes, another bill creates new requirements entirely. Senate Bill 1188 creates a new section on all state medical records listing patients’ assigned sex at birth and any physical sexual development disorders. It also bans changes to those gender markers for any reason other than clerical errors, and creates civil penalties for medical professionals who do change them.
House Democrats opposing the measure during floor discussion worried that SB 1188 may scare medical providers into inputting vague or inaccurate health information out of fear of fiscal or legal retribution. The bill does allow the new section to include information on a patients’ gender identity, however health care services must opt-in to provide it.
The bill also creates restrictions on where health care providers can store patient data and the physical servers they use to store them, and new regulations on how artificial intelligence can be used to create diagnoses.
SB 1188 is not the only bill opponents have said will create a chilling effect on the LGBTQ+ community. Some bills may be more immediate in blocking options people have to do things like change their state records, but others like SB 1188 and Senate Bill 1257 may reduce what resources are available. SB 1257 was signed by Abbott in May and mandates that insurance companies provide coverage for gender detransitioning care if they already cover gender transition care.
Proponents of the law claim it enforces responsibility onto insurance companies. The law is not a ban on gender-affirming care, however opponents worry it may act as one by incentivizing insurance companies to pull coverage altogether rather than take on potential new costs.
SB 1257 is the first legal mandate for detransition care in the United States, making Texas a testing ground for insurance companies’ appetite to keep or pull coverage. Similar bills in Arizona, Florida and Tennessee did not pass out of their respective state legislatures in 2024.
Less protections and resources for LGBTQ+ youth
Medical gender transition care for minors was banned in Texas by the Legislature in 2023, a restriction that was upheld by the state Supreme Court in 2024. House Bill 18, primarily an overhaul of rural health care including a rural pediatric mental health care program, bans minors from accessing its resources for gender-affirming mental health counseling “inconsistent with the child’s biological sex.”
The current gender transition care ban for minors does not include mental health services, only puberty blockers, hormone therapy and surgery, which is rare for those under 18. Another proposal headed to Abbott’s desk, House Bill 1106, asserts that parents who do not recognize or affirm their child’s gender identity cannot be held liable for abuse or neglect because of that lack of recognition.
More restrictions on LGBTQ+ presence in schools
Access to materials and resources related to LGBTQ+ subjects are also being restricted by legislators through two key bills primarily aimed at schools. Senate Bill 12 bans Texas schools from teaching about sexual orientation or gender identity and forbids student clubs “based on” those subjects.
The bill would prevent clubs like Gay-Straight Alliances and pride clubs, which are often tailored toward anti-bullying initiatives in schools. Opponents of the bill claim a ban on those clubs would cut off LGBTQ+ students from communities and resources that can save lives.
“One of the deadliest things that our youth go through is experiencing the perception at least of isolation, and GSAs are a powerful way that we can combat that and make sure that our youth are getting support,” said Ash Hall, ACLU Texas’ policy and advocacy strategist for LGBTQIA+ rights.
While SB 12 restricts instruction and student groups, Senate Bill 13 gives school boards and new advisory councils greater oversight to remove books from school libraries that go against “local community values.” Some lawmakers and advocates worry school boards and advisory councils would be able to restrict books containing LGBTQ+ material.
A third bill, Senate Bill 18, would have banned “drag-time story hours” at municipal libraries and cut funding to those who host them, however that bill was unintentionally killed by Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick after a procedural error at the end of the Senate’s deadline to pass bills.
Bills that failed to pass
The small set of bills passed by legislators shift the state’s treatment of LGBTQ+ Texans significantly, but still represent a fraction of what lawmakers proposed. House Bill 239, this session’s bathroom ban bill, was one of the over 100 bills that did not survive and was never heard by lawmakers despite half of the House signing on as coauthors. House Bill 2704 sought a similar ban through private lawsuits rather than criminal charges, but was never picked up by lawmakers.
Also left unheard was House Bill 3817, filed by Rep. Tom Oliverson, R-Cypress, which would have created a new felony charge for “gender identity fraud” if a person represented themselves as a gender besides the one they were assigned at birth to state agencies or employers.
Advocates like Johnathan Gooch, communications director for Equality Texas, say that the Legislature has kept its course on anti-trans legislation for the last few sessions, and that bills that didn’t get picked up by legislators may be at the forefront of future sessions.
“We’re hearing rhetoric that we’ve heard for a very long time and just more, more bills, a variety of new ways to narrow the rights of trans people,” Gooch said. “It just doesn’t come as a mistake that the number of bills is escalating.”
Citing President Trump’s threat to cut off federal education funding for school districts that provide protections for LGBTQ people, school board members in the Montezuma-Cortez district in southwestern Colorado are poised to remove sexual orientation and gender identity from the district’s nondiscrimination policy.
“Our district uses federal grant monies and Trump has indicated those grants are at risk if any district continues to support certain previously protected classes like sexual orientation, gender expression, or gender identity,” Mike Lynch, a school board member and the policy committee chair, said at a board meeting late last month.
The proposed policy changes in Montezuma-Cortez represent just one example of how some Colorado school districts are rushing to comply — or over-comply — with federal ultimatums based on questionable legal foundations. Many legal experts say the Trump administration cannot, on its own, exclude transgender people from federal anti-discrimination law and that Colorado law, which includes protections for LGBTQ people, supersedes school district policy anyway.
But efforts to remove protections at the local level send harmful messages about who is valued and who isn’t, they say.
“I think it does damage to queer students because it signals that this school district … doesn’t believe that these students are worthy of protection,” Scott Skinner-Thompson, associate professor of law at the University of Colorado Boulder.
Montezuma-Cortez, a conservative-leaning district with about 2,400 students, has taken other steps to curtail LGBTQ symbols and school activities in recent years. The school board is scheduled to take a final vote on the proposed nondiscrimination policy on June 24.
MB McAfee, a retired social worker and district resident, said she doesn’t know of any case where federal funds were withheld by the Trump administration, but worries about that possibility, particularly when it comes to money for students with disabilities.
But she’s also angry about the proposed policy changes, calling them “another step toward exclusion.”
“If we do that,” she asked, “then what’s going to be next?”
School districts react to funding threats
Trump has targeted transgender rights since his first day in office. In January and February, he issued several executive orders on the topic, including one that describes sex as determined at conception and unchangeable and another that threatens to withhold federal funds from schools that allow transgender girls to play girls sports.
The Trump administration has moved to strip federal funding from Maine because that state allows transgender girls to compete on girls’ teams. A judge blocked the federal government from withholding school lunch money while the case continues.
So far, no school district has lost money because of policies protecting transgender students. But Lynch emphasized that risk when he explained the proposed policy revision to the school board in May.
Asked by Chalkbeat what executive order or federal guidance required the removal of “sexual orientation” from the policy, Lynch later said by email that he’d mistakenly cited the term when he spoke to the board about federal dollars being in jeopardy.
For now though, “sexual orientation” isn’t being restored to the policy, he said.
Montezuma-Cortez isn’t alone in making changes spurred by the Trump administration. Officials from several Colorado districts, including Woodland Park and District 49 near Colorado Springs, have cited Trump’s executive orders in pushing policy changes or other efforts aimed at revoking protections for transgender students.
In May, District 49 sued the state and the Colorado High School Activities Association arguing that Colorado law and the association’s policy violate students’ constitutional rights by allowing transgender youth to play on school sports teams that match their gender identity.
Montezuma-Cortez school board members had little to say about the implications of the proposed nondiscrimination policy changes.
Asked about the legal or practical implications, Lynch said he’s not an attorney and doesn’t know. School board President Sheri Noyes did not respond to Chalkbeat’s request for comment. Vice President Ed Rice declined to respond to specific questions from Chalkbeat, saying by email that the policy’s opening sentence “answers everything.”
As proposed, that sentence says, “The Board is committed to providing a learning and work environment where all members of the school community are treated with dignity and respect.” The current version of the policy says “safe learning and work environment” but the revision takes out the word “safe.”
fleeredstates.blog 
You must be logged in to post a comment.