The tree-lined neighborhood near Nollendorfplatz square in central Berlinis as gay today as it was a century ago.
It’s where Christopher Isherwood wrote novels chronicling the rise of the Nazis amid the city’s rich queer nightlife that inspired the musical Cabaret.
Every summer, the neighborhood throws its own smaller-scale LGBTQ+ Pride event separate from the city’s main annual parade taking place this weekend.
It’s just one of more than 200 Pride events taking place in Germany this year. But with far-right extremist groups staging anti-Pride protests, many Pride attendees fear for their safety.
Sipping on a cocktail as the street party gets underway, 62-year-old Georg Schmidt says he’s relieved that this event is a relaxed affair. He says he attended a different local pride parade last month across town in the district of Marzahn and the mood there was tense.
“There was a massive police presence to shield us from anti-Pride protests. We only felt safe because the police kept us apart,” Schmidt says.
Sabine Volk, a researcher at the Institute for Research on Far Right Extremism at the University of Tübingen,says these groups attract young men who promote what they call traditional family values — a kind of pride that has little to do with rainbow flags.
“The key slogan is that the German flag and Germany itself is already colorful enough,” Volk says. “And the overall message is that queer life does not have a place in Germany.”
But it’s not just far-right extremists who are exacting about flags.
Speaking on public broadcaster ARD, Merz signaled his support for the rule at Germany’s parliament, the Bundestag, with the words, “the Bundestag is not a circus tent” — a remark to which many have taken umbrage.
Merz backs his colleague’s argument that the lower house must maintain neutrality and cannot support events with a political agenda.
Opposition Green Party lawmaker Nyke Slawik criticized the move. “Declaring the rainbow a political symbol is highly problematic” stressing that “queer people are not an ideology; they are people!” Slawik told public broadcaster ZDF.
Slawik argues they are people increasingly in need of protection. Germany’s federal police report an almost tenfold increase in reported queerphobic hate crimes since 2010 and they believe the majority of cases go unreported.
The issue is not divided by party political lines; criticism of Merz’s choice of words has come from within his own party. Sönke Siegmann, the chair of the Christian Democrats’ LGBTQ+ Association, says some within his party are still catching up on terminology.
“If you say queer in my party, most people take a deep breath and say: ‘Oh, that’s a left-wing term,’ ” Siegmann observes. He says he has spoken with Merz since he made his “circus tent” comments.
“We explained to him what queer really means and two days later when asked in Parliament about LBGTQ+ hate crimes and what his government will do about them, Merz actually used the term queer,” Siegmann says.
Back inthe Nollendorfplatz area, rainbow flags fly every month of the year. But local resident Chris Kelly says the mood here is not as “live and let live” as it once was. He recently opened a boutique that sells high-end garments made from industrial strength rubber. He says business is good and he has a broad customer base, but it was almost impossible trying to find premises for the boutique.
“We found plenty of suitable spaces to rent and our finances are solid, but a lot of landlords rejected us, saying they didn’t want people like us,” Kelly remembers. “Real estate agents had warned us, but I was flabbergasted to encounter such prejudice in Berlin’s queerest, gayest neighborhood.”
Kelly’s store is located just down the street from Romeo and Romeo, a gay bar whose owner was attacked last month. Kelly says he too gets more verbal abuse than he used to and he hears again and again of attacks on members of the LGBTQ+ community.
“I’m almost 40 and have seen so much progress like equal marriage,” Kelly says. “But something is changing. Hatred towards people like me is becoming mainstream again.”
Kelly points out that a few doors down in the other direction is where the legendary nightclub Eldorado stood until the Nazis closed it down in 1933, eventually sending its queer clientele to concentration camps.
As preparations for Berlin’s main Pride parade get underway, the city police say they’ve received a permit request for a counterdemonstration protesting “against Pride terror and identity disorders.”
In reaction to the Bundestag president’s decision not to fly the rainbow flag on top of parliament this year, Berlin’s transport authority has decorated its Bundestag subway station stop in rainbow colors, writing on Instagram: “So our Bundestag is ready for Pride.”
Kelly urges people to attend Pride and stand up to a new generation of the far-right. He has no desire to say Goodbye to Berlin and the neighborhood around Nollendorfplatz, as Isherwood was forced to do.
The rainbow Pride flag can once again fly over Bozeman City Hall after commissioners voted Tuesday night to make it an official city flag, sidestepping a Montana state law targeting the controversial symbol.
Four out of five of Bozeman’s commissioners supported the Pride flag, with the lone vote of dissent made by Commissioner Douglas Fischer, who argued that the flag was divisive and threatened to “drive a wedge” into the community.
Bozeman Mayor Terry Cunningham spoke to the commission after hearing more than five hours of intense public comment on the issue, both for and against the resolution. Cunningham said it was clear to him that Bozeman had a responsibility to stand for a “safe, welcoming and diverse community,” and adopting the Pride flag sends that signal.
“Everyone is welcome in Bozeman, and they are welcome under that flag,” Cunningham said.
The resolution declares “the Pride flag and its variants to be official flags of the city of Bozeman” and allows the mayor and city manager to choose when and where to fly the flags on city property. The resolution does not alter or replace the current city flag.
Public comment stretched late into the night as commissioners heard more than 70 people voice their opinions on the issue, with a relatively even split in opposition or support of the flag. City officials reported receiving more than 585 emails on the topic.
Rowan Larson addressed the commission as a new Bozeman resident, the rector of St. James Episcopal Church, and a member of the queer community. Larson said they moved to Bozeman in 2023 and “attitudes have gotten progressively worse,” to the point that the church can no longer fly Pride flags out of fear of retribution.
“We can no longer safely fly the Pride flag at our church because it is a danger to me, personally,” Larson said.
In contrast, openly gay, military veteran Andrew Jefferis said he’d called Bozeman home for 10 years and has never felt targeted for his sexual orientation while in the city.
“I feel like the implementation of this flag would only exist as evidence that the city of Bozeman needs to prove how good it is to its people, when it doesn’t have to,” Jefferis said. “The city is inherently welcoming.”
Ultimately, commissioners chose to support the Pride flag, with Commissioner Emma Bode saying state lawmakers had brought the fight to the city when they targeted the well-known symbol of gay rights, not the other way around.
“We did not start this,” Bode said. “The Legislature has pushed us.”
House Bill 819, passed by Montana’s Legislature in May and signed by Gov. Greg Gianforte, restricts “politically charged symbols on state property,” citing problems with enforcement, legal challenges, divisiveness and problems with neutrality and inclusivity in government.
However, opponents of the bill say it was specifically written to target municipalities that chose to fly the Pride flag in support of Montana’s queer community.
During Tuesday’s meeting, Bozeman City Attorney Greg Sullivan clarified that when the Pride flag was originally flown over city hall in 2021, it was protected as “government speech” under state law, but he added that the law had changed when the Legislature passed HB 819.
In a memorandum to the city commission, Bozeman’s city manager, Chuck Winn, outlined several fiscal concerns related to adopting the flag, writing: “Adopting the Pride flag may draw increased attention to the City’s diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives and related executive orders. This could invite legal challenges or public scrutiny, leading to unplanned legal costs and additional staff time to respond. The increased attention could also lead to closer examination of other City initiatives, potentially complicating federal grant processes if concerns are raised about compliance with executive orders.”
Commissioner Jennifer Madgic asked the city manager to elaborate on the potential political fallout.
“We do not know what effects adopting the Pride flag or flying the Pride flag will have on those opportunities,” Winn answered, adding that Bozeman has applied for federal grants for housing, law enforcement and the fire department, and those grants could be affected by the adoption of the flag.
However, Winn went on to say that he wasn’t aware of any retaliatory measures taken by the state or federal governments against cities, including Missoula, Butte, Boise, and Salt Lake City, that have adopted the Pride flag.
Deputy Mayor Joey Morrison said he suspects lawmakers who have targeted the Pride flag are seeing their suppression efforts thwarted because local governments can easily bypass the legislation.
“This is no workaround; this is complying with the law,” Morrison said. “The law says cities can adopt official flags. Here is the procedure where we can adopt an official flag.”
For Jason Baide, who chairs the civic group Queer Bozeman, Tuesday’s decision to adopt the Pride flag was a big win, but also a defensive act for the community he represents.
“I am surprised by the level of opposition to our existence and some of the hateful comments that came through in this,” Baide told Montana Free Press after the meeting. “There was some harm done to folks,” during the hours of debate heard by the commission, but “we’re going to rally together and celebrate this.”
Police in the Malaysian state of Kelantan arrested 12 men during a raid on a “gay party,” the regional news site Sloboden Pecat reported. The arrests follow 20 that occurred in the state capital of Kota Bharu in June, amid a nationwide crackdown on LGBTQ+ people.
Kelantan state police chief Mohd Yusof Mamat said that officers found no evidence of sexual activity at the party, but they did discover condoms and HIV medication, suggesting that sexual activity may have been planned for later on. Police also found that three men had explicit adult images on their phones — police arrested and charged those three individuals. The officers didn’t arrest any additional people because they could find neither incriminating evidence nor specific charges to press against them.
“During interrogation, [party attendees] admitted that they belonged to a homosexual group,” Mamat said. “We are concerned about this type of behavior… We will continue to monitor the movements of homosexual groups.”
The police chief said over 100 local men attended the party, though most of them had left by the time the raid began.
Like one-fourth of the world, Malaysia’s anti-gay laws were originally imported by British colonizers. In the modern era, powerful Muslim clerics and politicians have used the laws to whip up outrage and support among conservative citizens. Recently, anti-LGBTQ+ sentiment in the country has gotten louder and deadlier.
In 2023, the Malaysian government reportedly began requiring music venues to have an emergency “kill switch” to quickly shut down concerts following an onstage same-sex kiss between members of the British rock band The 1975 at a Malaysian music festival. Government authorities also said that police will now conduct background checks on artists from other countries before scheduling performances to ensure that they will not promote illegal activities.
In 2022, 20 local Muslims were detained by religious authorities for cross-dressing or “encouraging vice” during a raid on an LGBTQ+ Halloween party. Local censors also said that between 2020 and May of this year, LGBTQ+ content accounted for half of all banned publications, the South China Morning Post reported.
In 2019, Malaysia caned four men between the ages of 26 and 37 for having a consensual same-sex encounter behind closed doors. The men’s actions violated a Sharia law forbidding “intercourse against the order of nature.” The men were reportedly discovered by authorities after the government monitored their “private” messaging. Around 50 officers raided the apartment where the men met to arrest those involved.
In March 2019, Tourism Minister Datuk Mohamaddin Ketapi claimed there are no queer or trans people in Malaysia, a statement which drew condemnation from the country’s LGBTQ+ community. Despite the country’s anti-LGBTQ+ actions, it still hosts an annual Seksualiti Merdeka (Independent Sexuality) festival, though politicians have increasingly tried to prevent it from occurring.
Since 2019, multiple trans women in Malaysia have also been beaten, hospitalized, or killed by violent mobs.
In August 2018, police in Kuala Lumpur raided the gay bar Blue Boy — afterwards, the Federal Territory ministry claimed the arrests were meant to “stop the spread of LGBTQ culture in society.” That same month, authorities sentenced two women to public caning for “attempted sexual relations.”
Texas Gov. Greg Abbott (R) has called a special legislative session to address the deadly floods that have left 134 people dead and 101 others missing. However, in preparation for the session, state GOP lawmakers have filed 82 measures, none of which address the flooding. Instead, they seek to ban transgender women from using women’s facilities (and Abbott personally supports the idea).
In Abbott’s proclamation for the special session, he laid out 18 priorities. The first four addressed the need for improved emergency warning, communication, and aid systems. The other priorities included further restricting abortions and election access, gerrymandering the state electoral map to favor Republicans, and “legislation protecting women’s privacy in sex-segregated spaces.”
The state constitution says legislators can only file bills related to the governor’s priorities, but Republican legislators haven’t filed any bills related to the deadly floods, KXAN reported.
Instead, Republican state Rep. Valoree Swanson filed H.B. 32, which would require people only to use facilities in public schools, state universities, government-owned buildings, jails, and family violence shelters that match the “biological sex” assigned on their original birth certificate. Texas recently changed its laws to forbid transgender people from changing the gender markers on their birth certificates and driver’s licenses.
Anyone who allows the proposed law to be violated could be subject to civil fines from $5,000 to $25,000, as well as additional penalties. Swanson filed a similar bill during the previous legislative session, but it failed to pass after missing several legislative deadlines, Chron reported.
Three other special session bills, H.B. 37, 65, and 70, would punish any person or internet service provider who aids or abets the distribution of abortion medication.
H.B. 38, introduced by Democratic state Rep. Jessica Gonzalez (who is also chair of the Texas House LGBTQ Ca ucus), would prohibit workplace, housing, and public accommodations discrimination against LGBTQ+ people, but there’s no way it’ll pass the state’s Republican-majority legislative chambers. It’s also unclear how the bill relates to Abbott’s list of priorities.
“I am proud to have filed H.B. 38 in preparation for the upcoming special session of our legislature,” González wrote in a statement on Tuesday. “H.B. 38 is a comprehensive nondiscrimination bill that would codify equal protection for the LGBTQ+ community and military veterans in employment, housing, and public accommodations.”
Just days before this weekend’s Pride parade in Northumbria in Northern England, a judge ruled that the local police department’s chief constable wrongfully allowed uniformed officers to march under a Progress Pride flag at last year’s celebration.
In a controversial decision critics say is riven with bias, the judge claimed officers marching with the flag breached their duty to impartiality and endangered imagined protesters with “gender critical” views.
The judicial review was brought by a female event participant who objected to police officers “associating with messaging which was supportive of the cause of gender ideology,” The Times of London reported.
In her challenge, plaintiff Lindsey Smith highlighted a decision to allow officers to station a police van decorated in colors “indicative of support for the cause of gender ideology… namely the colors of the Progress flag.”
The “messaging which was supportive of the cause of gender ideology, including in the form of placards, chanting, imagery or flags,” was a threat to her personal safety, she said.
The judge in the case, Mr. Justice Linden, agreed, ruling it was “contrary to the uniformed officers’ duties of impartiality”, as well as the chief constable’s “own duty of impartiality, to participate in the 2024 march in the way that they did.”
“The fact that they wore their uniforms, marched as a contingent and carried the Police Pride and other flags demonstrated their support for the cause as police officers,” the judge said, and by extension indicated hostility to those with “gender critical” views.
“It is not hard to imagine circumstances in which officers in question might be called on to deal with a clash between gender critical people and supporters of gender ideology, and therefore situations where the former had cause for concern as to whether they were being dealt with impartially,” the judge wrote.
The judge implied this “perceived” bias would influence officers’ decisions to permit “gender critical” people to demonstrate at all and could result in attempts to “eject a gender critical person from the march.”
Smith’s lawyer, Paul Conrathe, said the ruling was of “national importance.”
Referring to so-called “gender ideology,” Smith said British police “must be above the fray and avoid taking sides” on what he called “contested issues.”
Northumbria police responded that their “primary aim” during last year’s march was “to keep people safe.” The event also provided the force “with an opportunity to engage with people including those who may have less confidence in policing,” they said following the ruling.
The department added that senior Northumbria officers would “work through the ruling to understand the implications.” They did not clarify whether officers would be allowed to march in the Pride parade this weekend.
New HampshireRepublican Gov. Kelly Ayotte has gone against her party and vetoed two anti-LGBTQ+ bills and three other far-right ones.
Ayotte vetoed the bills Tuesday, while signing 101 others into law.
House Bill 324 would have barred schools from distributing books and other materials deemed “harmful to minors.” It was aimed primarily at sexual content and likely would have been used against books with LGBTQ+ characters and themes. It also would have required school districts to strengthen the process through which parents could challenge these materials.
“Current state law appears to provide a mechanism for parents through their local school district to exercise their rights to ensure their children are not exposed to inappropriate materials,” Ayotte said in her veto message. Under this law, “parents must be notified at least two weeks in advance of course materials that involve human sexuality, sexual education, sexual orientation, gender, gender identity, or gender expression,” she noted. “If a parent objects in writing, New Hampshire law further requires an alternative agreed upon between the school district and the parent.”
“Therefore, I do not believe the State of New Hampshire needs to, nor should it, engage in the role of addressing questions of literary value and appropriateness, particularly where the system created by House Bill 324 calls for monetary penalties based on subjective standards,” Ayotte added. Parents who were dissatisfied could have filed lawsuits.
House Bill 148 would have let businesses and correctional facilities to classify and segregate people by sex assigned at birth rather than gender identity, affecting restroom and locker room use. State law bans discrimination based on gender identity, but under the bill, these classifications would not have been considered a violation of the law.
“I believe there are important and legitimate privacy and safety concerns raised by biological males using places such as female locker rooms and being placed in female correctional facilities,” Ayotte wrote. “At the same time, I see that House Bill 148 is overly broad and impractical to enforce, potentially creating an exclusionary environment for some of our citizens.” It could have led to lawsuits as well, she said. Her immediate predecessor as governor, fellow Republican Chris Sununu, had vetoed a similar bill.
Additionally, Ayotte vetoed House Bill 358, “which would make it easier for parents to apply for religious exemptions to child vaccine requirements in school,” House Bill 446, “which would require schools to get explicit parental permission before giving students non-academic surveys,” and House Bill 667, “which would require sex education courses to include ‘a high quality computer generated animation or ultrasound video that shows the development of the heart, brain, and other vital organs in early fetal development,’” the New Hampshire Bulletin reports. She also vetoed two budget-related bills.
It would take a two-thirds majority in both the state House and Senate to override Ayotte’s vetoes. Republicans do not have a veto-proof majority in the House.
House Democratic Leader Alexis Simpson issued a statement Tuesday praising the vetoes without mentioning Ayotte. “We’re grateful that today New Hampshire chose to protect the rights and dignity of our transgender neighbors — and House Democrats will keep fighting until every Granite Stater can live freely, openly, and safely, no matter who they are,” Simpson said, according to the Bulletin.
Puerto Rico’sRepublican Gov. Jenniffer González-Colón signed into law Wednesday a far-reaching ban on gender-affirming medical care for transgender people under 21, enacting one of the harshest measures of its kind in the United States and its territories and prompting swift condemnation from medical experts and LGBTQ+ advocates.
The law received the governor’s approval late in the day, according to the Associated Press.
The law, Senate Bill 350, prohibits the use of puberty blockers, hormone therapy, and gender-affirming surgeries for anyone under 21, threatening doctors and other health professionals with up to 15 years in prison, a $50,000 fine, and the permanent loss of their licenses and permits. Public funds are also barred from being used for such care.
In recent days, the College of Physicians and Surgeons, the Association of Psychology, the College of Social Work Professionals, the Puerto Rican Association of Professional Counseling, and the Bar Association, among other organizations, had urged that the bill be vetoed.
The Advocate previously reported that González-Colón had asked for amendments to protect access to puberty blockers and allow minors already undergoing treatment to continue care, but lawmakers did not adopt those changes. Last month, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Skrmetti that a Tennessee ban on gender-affirming care for minors could be enacted, which allowed other states and territories to continue to ban such care.
“What a disgrace! Jenniffer González, through her actions, declares herself the most anti-equality governor in history. She ignored her own Secretary of Health and the medical associations that support treatment for trans minors. By signing Senate Bill 350 into law, she has just endangered trans youth and their families and criminalized health professionals for doing their job,” Pedro Julio Serrano, president of the Puerto Rico LGBTQ+ Federation, said in a statement to The Advocate.
Harvard Law Instructor Alejandra Caraballo reacted to the law’s signing on Bluesky. “A twenty-year-old trans person can go drink themselves to death but can’t legally get hormones,” she wrote, noting that the drinking age in Puerto Rico is 18.
The Federation, a coalition representing hundreds of individuals and more than 100 organizations, said it would pursue legal action against the new law.
A lot of states are passing laws that target the LGBTQ+ community — but these 15 are the absolute worst.
Over 1,000 anti-LGBTQ+ laws have been proposed across every state legislature in the U.S. over the past two years, according to the American Civil Liberties Union, and 126 have passed into law. Less than two months into the 2025 legislative session, 390 laws targeting LGBTQ+ people have been proposed.
While marriage equality and anti-discrimination protections based on sexual orientation and gender identity are still guaranteed federally by U.S. Supreme Court rulings (for now), LGBTQ+ people are still concerned about their rights being taken away, especially when only 15 states have “shield laws” protecting access to gender-affirming care and abortion.
Based on laws surrounding marriage, family rights, health care, education, and youth collected by the Movement Advancement Project, here are the 15 worst states for LGBTQ+ people.
Pride Parade in Huntsville, Alabama (October 1, 2022)
Nondiscrimination laws: Alabama does not have nondiscrimination laws in employment, housing, health care, education, public accommodations, or credit/lending. Its state code incorrectly defines sex as exclusively male or female, and it prohibits transgender people from using public facilities that align with their identities.
Marriage equality and parental rights: Alabama does not have adoption or foster care nondiscrimination protections for LGBTQ+ parents. It does not have second-parent adoption for unmarried couples, confirmatory adoption, nor recognition for parents using assisted reproductive technologies. It also does not have family leave laws that encompass LGBTQ+ people.
Education and youth policies: Alabama has a “Don’t Say Gay” law restricting discussion of LGBTQ+ identities in classrooms. It has banned trans students from participating in sports or using school facilities based on their identities, and it requires staff to forcibly out LGBTQ+ students to their guardians. The state also has a “religious exemption” law for Child Welfare Services.
Healthcare access and rights: Alabama has banned life-saving gender-affirming care for youth, though it permits the discredited and harmful practice of so-called conversion therapy for youth. Health insurance companies, including Medicaid, are not required to provide coverage related to gender transition or fertility treatments. The state also has a “religious exemption” law for healthcare providers.
Criminal justice: Alabama’s hate crime laws do not encompass sexual orientation and gender identity, and it has not banned the so-called “LGBTQ+ panic” defense.
Arkansas
Danielsen_Photography / Shutterstock.com
3rd annual Pride Walk at Hot Springs National Park, Arkansas (June, 4 2021)
Nondiscrimination laws: Arkansas does not have nondiscrimination laws in employment, housing, health care, education, public accommodations, or credit/lending. The state bans cities and local ordinances from passing nondiscrimination laws, and it has law about “adult” performances that could be used to target or restrict drag.
Marriage equality and parental rights: Arkansas does not have adoption or foster care nondiscrimination protections for LGBTQ+ parents. It does not have second-parent adoption for unmarried couples, confirmatory adoption, nor recognition for parents using assisted reproductive technologies. It also does not have family leave laws that encompass LGBTQ+ people.
Education and youth policies: Arkansas has a “Don’t Say Gay” law restricting discussion of LGBTQ+ identities in classrooms. It has banned trans students from participating in sports or using school facilities based on their identities, and it requires staff to forcibly out LGBTQ+ students to their guardians.
Healthcare access and rights: Arkansas has banned life-saving gender-affirming care for youth, though it permits the discredited and harmful practice of so-called conversion therapy for youth. Medicaid is forbidden from providing coverage related to gender transition to minors, and insurance companies are not required to cover fertility treatments. The state also has a “religious exemption” law for healthcare providers.
Criminal justice: Arkansas’ hate crime laws do not encompass sexual orientation and gender identity, and it has not banned the so-called “LGBTQ+ panic” defense. It has an HIV criminalization law that may require sex offender registration.
Florida
Chris_Harris / Shutterstock.com
Mourners pay their respects to the fallen at the Pulse Nightclub memorial on the 5th anniversary of the Pulse mass shooting in Orlando, Florida (June 12, 2021)
Nondiscrimination laws: Florida has nondiscrimination laws in employment, housing, and public accommodations, but not in credit/lending, health care, nor education. The state prohibits transgender people from using public facilities that align with their identities, and it does not allow updating gender markers on driver’s licenses or birth certificates. It has law about “adult” performances that could be used to target or restrict drag
Marriage equality and parental rights: Florida does not have adoption or foster care nondiscrimination protections for LGBTQ+ parents. It does not have second-parent adoption for unmarried couples, confirmatory adoption, nor recognition for parents using assisted reproductive technologies. It also does not have family leave laws that encompass LGBTQ+ people.
Education and youth policies: Florida originated the “Don’t Say Gay” laws restricting discussion of LGBTQ+ identities in classrooms. It has banned trans students from participating in sports or using school facilities based on their identities, and it requires staff to forcibly out LGBTQ+ students to their guardians.
Healthcare access and rights: Florida has banned life-saving gender-affirming care for youth, though it permits the discredited and harmful practice of so-called conversion therapy for youth. Medicaid is forbidden from providing coverage related to gender transition for all ages, and insurance companies are not required to cover fertility treatments. The state also has a “religious exemption” law for healthcare providers.
Criminal justice: Florida’s hate crime laws only encompass sexual orientation, not gender identity. It has not banned the so-called “LGBTQ+ panic” defense, and it has an HIV criminalization law.
Idaho
Venture Out Media / Shutterstock.com
Rally in support of transgender youth and gender-affirming care in Boise, Idaho (February 24, 2023)
Nondiscrimination laws: Idaho has nondiscrimination laws in employment, housing, and public accommodations, but not in credit/lending, education, health care, nor for state employees. Its state code incorrectly defines sex as exclusively male or female.
Marriage equality and parental rights: Idaho does not have adoption or foster care nondiscrimination protections for LGBTQ+ parents. It has second-parent adoption for unmarried couples, but not confirmatory adoption nor recognition for parents using assisted reproductive technologies. It also does not have family leave laws that encompass LGBTQ+ people.
Education and youth policies: Idaho has banned trans students from participating in sports or using school facilities based on their identities, and it requires staff to forcibly out LGBTQ+ students to their guardians. The state also has a “religious exemption” law for Child Welfare Services, though it has protections for LGBTQ+ youth in the Child Welfare System.
Healthcare access and rights: Idaho has banned life-saving gender-affirming care for youth, though it permits the discredited and harmful practice of so-called conversion therapy for youth. Medicaid is forbidden from providing coverage related to gender transition for all ages, and insurance companies are not required to cover fertility treatments. The state also has a “religious exemption” law for healthcare providers.
Criminal justice: Idaho’s hate crime laws do not encompass sexual orientation and gender identity. It has not banned the so-called “LGBTQ+ panic” defense, and it has an HIV criminalization law.
Indiana
Umut Tolga Pehlivan / Shutterstock.com
Indiana University Bloomington Students walking at Indy Pride in Indianapolis, Indiana (June 4, 2008)
Nondiscrimination laws: Indiana has weaker nondiscrimination laws in employment, housing, and public accommodations, but not in credit/lending, education, nor health care. The state also has a broad “religious exemption” law.
Marriage equality and parental rights: Indiana has adoption or foster care nondiscrimination protections based on sexual orientation, but not gender identity. It has second-parent adoption for unmarried couples, but not confirmatory adoption nor recognition for parents using assisted reproductive technologies. It also does not have family leave laws that encompass LGBTQ+ people.
Education and youth policies: Indiana has a “Don’t Say Gay” law restricting discussion of LGBTQ+ identities in classrooms. It has banned trans students from participating in sports or using school facilities based on their identities, and it requires staff to forcibly out LGBTQ+ students to their guardians.
Healthcare access and rights: Indiana has banned life-saving gender-affirming care for youth, though it permits the discredited and harmful practice of so-called conversion therapy for youth. Medicaid and state health insurance plans are not required to provide coverage related to gender transition or fertility treatments, but it has trans-inclusive health benefits for state employees.
Criminal justice: Indiana’s hate crime laws do not encompass sexual orientation and gender identity, and it has not banned the so-called “LGBTQ+ panic” defense. It has an HIV criminalization law that may require sex offender registration.
Louisiana
Scott Colesby / Shutterstock.com
Southern Decadence Parade march through the French Quarter in New Orleans, Louisiana (September 1, 2024)
Nondiscrimination laws: Louisiana does not have nondiscrimination laws in employment, housing, health care, education, public accommodations, or credit/lending. Its state code incorrectly defines sex as exclusively male or female, and it prohibits transgender people from using public facilities that align with their identities. The state also has a broad “religious exemption” law.
Marriage equality and parental rights: Louisiana does not have adoption or foster care nondiscrimination protections for LGBTQ+ parents. It does not have second-parent adoption for unmarried couples, confirmatory adoption, nor recognition for parents using assisted reproductive technologies. It also does not have family leave laws that encompass LGBTQ+ people.
Education and youth policies: Louisiana has a “Don’t Say Gay” law restricting discussion of LGBTQ+ identities in classrooms. It has banned trans students from participating in sports or using school facilities based on their identities, and it requires staff to forcibly out LGBTQ+ students to their guardians.
Healthcare access and rights: Louisiana has banned life-saving gender-affirming care for youth, though it permits the discredited and harmful practice of so-called conversion therapy for youth. Health insurance companies, including Medicaid, are not required to provide coverage related to gender transition or fertility treatments, and state employees do not have trans-inclusive benefits.
Criminal justice: Louisiana’s hate crime laws only encompass sexual orientation, not gender identity. It has not banned the so-called “LGBTQ+ panic” defense, and it has an HIV criminalization law that may require sex offender registration.
Mississippi
Carmen K. Sisson / Shutterstock.com
A rainbow flag supporting Pride month flies a the Biloxi VA Medical Center in Biloxi, Mississippi (June 5, 2023)
Nondiscrimination laws: Mississippi does not have nondiscrimination laws in employment, housing, health care, education, public accommodations, or credit/lending. Its state code incorrectly defines sex as exclusively male or female, and it prohibits transgender people from using public facilities that align with their identities. The state also has a broad “religious exemption” law.
Marriage equality and parental rights: Mississippi does not have adoption or foster care nondiscrimination protections for LGBTQ+ parents. It has second-parent adoption for unmarried couples, but not confirmatory adoption nor recognition for parents using assisted reproductive technologies. It also does not have family leave laws that encompass LGBTQ+ people.
Education and youth policies: Mississippi has a “Don’t Say Gay” law restricting discussion of LGBTQ+ identities in classrooms. It has banned trans students from participating in sports or using school facilities based on their identities, and it requires staff to forcibly out LGBTQ+ students to their guardians. The state also has a “religious exemption” law for Child Welfare Services.
Healthcare access and rights: Mississippi has banned life-saving gender-affirming care for youth, though it permits the discredited and harmful practice of so-called conversion therapy for youth. Medicaid is forbidden from providing coverage related to gender transition for youth, and insurance companies are not required to cover fertility treatments. The state also has a “religious exemption” law for healthcare providers.
Criminal justice: Mississippi’s hate crime laws do not encompass sexual orientation and gender identity. It has not banned the so-called “LGBTQ+ panic” defense, and it has an HIV criminalization law.
Missouri
Ryanzo W. Perez / Shutterstock.com
A view down one of the streets filled with celebrants during Saint Louis PrideFest in Missouri (June 24, 2023)
Nondiscrimination laws: Missouri has weaker nondiscrimination laws in housing, and public accommodations, but not in employment, credit/lending, education, nor health care. The state also has a broad “religious exemption” law.
Marriage equality and parental rights: Missouri’sadoption or foster care nondiscrimination protections only encompass sexual orientation, not gender identity. It does not have second-parent adoption for unmarried couples, confirmatory adoption, nor recognition for parents using assisted reproductive technologies. It also does not have family leave laws that encompass LGBTQ+ people.
Education and youth policies: Missouri has banned schools and districts from passing nondiscrimination or anti-bullying policies protecting LGBTQ+ students. It has banned trans students from participating in sports based on their identities, but not from using facilities that align with their identities.
Healthcare access and rights: Missouri has banned life-saving gender-affirming care for youth, though it permits the discredited and harmful practice of so-called conversion therapy for youth. Medicaid is forbidden from providing coverage related to gender transition for all ages, and insurance companies are not required to cover fertility treatments. The state also has a “religious exemption” law for healthcare providers.
Criminal justice: Missouri’s hate crime laws encompass sexual orientation and gender identity, though it has not banned the so-called “LGBTQ+ panic” defense, and it has an HIV criminalization law.
Montana
Cavan-Images / Shutterstock.com
“Say Gay” sign at Missoula Pride in Montana (March 29, 2024)
Nondiscrimination laws: Montana does not have nondiscrimination laws in employment, housing, health care, education, public accommodations, or credit/lending.Its state code incorrectly defines sex as exclusively male or female, and it has a broad “religious exemption” law. The state has also explicitly restricted drag performances, and does not allow updating gender markers on birth certificates
Marriage equality and parental rights: Montana’sadoption or foster care nondiscrimination protections only encompass sexual orientation, not gender identity. It has second-parent adoption for unmarried couples, but not confirmatory adoption nor recognition for parents using assisted reproductive technologies. It also does not have family leave laws that encompass LGBTQ+ people.
Education and youth policies: Montana requires that parents be notified of LGBTQ+ curricula so they can opt out. It has banned trans students from participating in sports based on their identities, but not from using facilities that align with their identities. The state requires staff to forcibly out LGBTQ+ students to their guardians.
Healthcare access and rights: Montana has banned life-saving gender-affirming care for youth, though it permits the discredited and harmful practice of so-called conversion therapy for youth. Health insurance companies and Medicaid are required to cover care related to gender transition, and there is some coverage for fertility treatments. However, the state has a “religious exemption” law for healthcare providers.
Criminal justice: Montana’s hate crime laws do not encompass sexual orientation and gender identity. It has not banned the so-called “LGBTQ+ panic” defense, and it has an HIV criminalization law.
Oklahoma
Kit Leong / Shutterstock.com
Pride Parade in Oklahoma (June 26, 2023)
Nondiscrimination laws: Oklahoma does not have nondiscrimination laws in employment, housing, health care, education, public accommodations, or credit/lending. Its state code incorrectly defines sex as exclusively male or female, and it prohibits updated gender markers on birth certificates. It also has a broad “religious exemption” law.
Marriage equality and parental rights: Oklahoma does not have adoption or foster care nondiscrimination protections for LGBTQ+ parents. It has second-parent adoption for unmarried couples, but not confirmatory adoption nor recognition for parents using assisted reproductive technologies. It also does not have family leave laws that encompass LGBTQ+ people.
Education and youth policies: Oklahoma has a weaker version of a “Don’t Say Gay” law that restricts the discussion of “homosexuality” in specific school subjects. It has banned trans students from participating in sports or using school facilities based on their identities. The state also has a “religious exemption” law for Child Welfare Services, though it has protections for LGBTQ+ youth in the Child Welfare System.
Healthcare access and rights: Oklahoma has banned life-saving gender-affirming care for youth, though it permits the discredited and harmful practice of so-called conversion therapy for youth. Health insurance companies, including Medicaid, are not required to provide coverage related to gender transition or fertility treatments, and state employees are not permitted trans-inclusive benefits.
Criminal justice: Oklahoma’s hate crime laws do not encompass sexual orientation and gender identity. It has not banned the so-called “LGBTQ+ panic” defense, and it has an HIV criminalization law.
South Carolina
Shuttershock creative
Rainbow flag on a map of South Carolina
Nondiscrimination laws: South Carolinadoes not have nondiscrimination laws in employment, housing, health care, education, public accommodations, or credit/lending. It has a broad “religious exemption” law.
Marriage equality and parental rights: South Carolina‘sadoption or foster care nondiscrimination protections only encompass sexual orientation, not gender identity. It does not have second-parent adoption for unmarried couples, confirmatory adoption, nor recognition for parents using assisted reproductive technologies. It also does not have family leave laws that encompass LGBTQ+ people.
Education and youth policies: South Carolinahas banned trans students from participating in sports based on their identities, but not from using facilities that align with their identities. The state requires staff to forcibly out LGBTQ+ students to their guardians. The state also has a “religious exemption” law for Child Welfare Services.
Healthcare access and rights: South Carolina has banned life-saving gender-affirming care for youth, though it permits the discredited and harmful practice of so-called conversion therapy for youth. Medicaid is forbidden from providing coverage related to gender transition for all ages, and insurance companies are not required to cover fertility treatments. The state also has a “religious exemption” law for healthcare providers.
Criminal justice: South Carolina‘s hate crime laws do not encompass sexual orientation and gender identity. It has not banned the so-called “LGBTQ+ panic” defense, and it has an HIV criminalization law.
South Dakota
Shuttershock creative
South Dakota state flag with rainbow stripes
Nondiscrimination laws: South Dakota does not have nondiscrimination laws in employment, housing, health care, education, public accommodations, or credit/lending. It has a broad “religious exemption” law.
Marriage equality and parental rights: South Dakota’sadoption or foster care nondiscrimination protections encompass sexual orientation and gender identity. However, it does not have second-parent adoption for unmarried couples, confirmatory adoption, nor recognition for parents using assisted reproductive technologies. It also does not have family leave laws that encompass LGBTQ+ people.
Education and youth policies: South Dakotahas banned schools and districts from passing nondiscrimination or anti-bullying policies protecting LGBTQ+ students. It has banned trans students from participating in sports based on their identities, but not from using facilities that align with their identities. The state also has a “religious exemption” law for Child Welfare Services, though it has protections for LGBTQ+ youth in the Child Welfare System.
Healthcare access and rights: South Dakota has banned life-saving gender-affirming care for youth, though it permits the discredited and harmful practice of so-called conversion therapy for youth. Health insurance companies, including Medicaid, are not required to provide coverage related to gender transition or fertility treatments, and state employees are not permitted trans-inclusive benefits.
Criminal justice: South Dakota‘s hate crime laws do not encompass sexual orientation and gender identity, and it has not banned the so-called “LGBTQ+ panic” defense. It has an HIV criminalization law that may require sex offender registration.
Tennessee
evenfh / Shutterstock.com
Pride Parade on Beale Street in Memphis, Tennessee (September 28, 2018)
Nondiscrimination laws: Tennessee does not have nondiscrimination laws in employment, housing, health care, education, public accommodations, or credit/lending. It instead bans cities and local ordinances from passing nondiscrimination laws. State code incorrectly defines sex as exclusively male or female, and it does not allow updating gender markers on driver’s licenses or birth certificates. The state has a broad “religious exemption” law that even allows officials to deny marriage licenses based on their personal beliefs. It has also explicitly restricted drag performances.
Marriage equality and parental rights: Tennessee’sadoption or foster care nondiscrimination protections encompass sexual orientation and gender identity. However, it does not have second-parent adoption for unmarried couples, confirmatory adoption, nor recognition for parents using assisted reproductive technologies. It also does not have family leave laws that encompass LGBTQ+ people.
Education and youth policies: Tennessee requires that parents be notified of LGBTQ+ curricula so they can opt out. It has banned trans students from participating in sports based on their identities and from using facilities that align with their identities. The state requires staff to forcibly out LGBTQ+ students to their guardians. The state also has a “religious exemption” law for Child Welfare Services, though it has protections for LGBTQ+ youth in the Child Welfare System.
Healthcare access and rights: Tennessee has banned life-saving gender-affirming care for youth, though it permits the discredited and harmful practice of so-called conversion therapy for youth. Medicaid is forbidden from providing coverage related to gender transition for all ages, and insurance companies are not required to cover fertility treatments. The state also has a “religious exemption” law for healthcare providers, and state employees are not permitted trans-inclusive benefits.
Criminal justice: Tennessee’s hate crime laws encompass sexual orientation and gender identity, though it has not banned the so-called “LGBTQ+ panic” defense, and it has an HIV criminalization law that may require sex offender registration.
Nondiscrimination laws: Texas has nondiscrimination laws in employment and for state employees, but not in housing, public accommodations, credit/lending, education, nor health care. The state does not allow updating gender markers on driver’s licenses or birth certificates, and it has a broad “religious exemption” law.
Marriage equality and parental rights: Texas does not have adoption or foster care nondiscrimination protections for LGBTQ+ parents. It does not have second-parent adoption for unmarried couples, confirmatory adoption, nor recognition for parents using assisted reproductive technologies. It also does not have family leave laws that encompass LGBTQ+ people.
Education and youth policies: Texas has a weaker version of a “Don’t Say Gay” law that restricts the discussion of “homosexuality” in specific school subjects. It has banned trans students from participating in sports based on their identities, but not from using facilities that align with their identities. The state also has a “religious exemption” law for Child Welfare Services without protections for LGBTQ+ youth.
Healthcare access and rights: Texas has banned life-saving gender-affirming care for youth, though it permits the discredited and harmful practice of so-called conversion therapy for youth. Medicaid is forbidden from providing coverage related to gender transition for all ages, and insurance companies are not required to cover fertility treatments. State employees are not permitted trans-inclusive benefits.
Criminal justice: Texas’s hate crime laws only encompass sexual orientation, not gender identity. It has not banned the so-called “LGBTQ+ panic” defense.
Wyoming
Shuttershock creative
Double rainbow against a black sky in Wyoming
Nondiscrimination laws: Wyoming does not have nondiscrimination laws in employment, housing, health care, education, public accommodations, or credit/lending.
Marriage equality and parental rights: Wyoming does not have adoption or foster care nondiscrimination protections for LGBTQ+ parents. It does not have second-parent adoption for unmarried couples, nor confirmatory adoption. It also does not have family leave laws that encompass LGBTQ+ people. However, it does have recognition for parents using assisted reproductive technologies.
Education and youth policies: Wyoming has a weaker version of a “Don’t Say Gay” law that restricts the discussion of “homosexuality” in specific school subjects. It has banned trans students from participating in sports based on their identities, but not from using facilities that align with their identities.
Healthcare access and rights: Wyoming has banned life-saving gender-affirming care for youth, though it permits the discredited and harmful practice of so-called conversion therapy for youth. Health insurance companies, including Medicaid, are not required to provide coverage related to gender transition or fertility treatments.
Criminal justice: Wyoming’s hate crime laws do not encompass sexual orientation and gender identity, and it has not banned the so-called “LGBTQ+ panic” defense.
Dishonorable mentions
BluIz70 / Shutterstock.com
People carry large balloon letters that spell out “Proud” as they walk in the annual pride parade in Atlanta, Georgia (October 15, 2023)
Other states that ranked below average include: Alaska, Arizona, Georgia, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Nebraska, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Utah, and West Virginia.
A district court in Ukraine has formally recognized a same-sex couple as family, the first legal precedent of its kind in the country, the Kyiv Independentreports.
The plaintiffs in the case were Zoryan Kis, first secretary of Ukraine’s Embassy in Israel, and his longtime partner, Tymur Levchuk. The couple has lived together since 2013 and were married in the U.S. in 2021.
Ukraine does not currently recognize same-sex marriages or civil unions.
In 2024, Ukraine’s Foreign Ministry refused to acknowledge Levchuk as Kis’ family member, denying him spousal rights to accompany his husband on his diplomatic posting to Tel Aviv. The couple filed a legal complaint naming the Foreign Ministry as a defendant in September.
The court’s decision cited both the Ukrainian constitution and precedent from the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR), to which Ukraine is a signatory. ECHR requires member states to ensure legal recognition and protection for same-sex families.
The couple’s shared finances and property, joint travel records, photographs, correspondence, and witness testimony were among the evidence considered by the court establishing a long-term domestic partnership.
“A very big and important step toward marriage equality in Ukraine, and a small victory in our struggle for ‘simple family happiness’ for Ukrainian diplomats,” Kis posted to Facebook after the court rendered its judgment.
“Now we have a court ruling that confirms the feelings Tymur Levchuk and I have for each other,” he said, while thanking the judge in the case.
Public support for LGBTQ+ rights in Ukraine has grown steadily in recent years as the country has drawn closer to Europe, and in particular after Russia’s war on the sovereign nation in 2022.
Legal progress on the issue has remained slow, however. Legislation recognizing civil partnerships was introduced in 2023 but hasn’t advanced through the Ukrainian parliament’s Legal Policy Committee.
The proposed bill would legalize civil partnerships for both same-sex and heterosexual couples, providing inheritance, medical, and property rights, but not the full status of marriage.
Kis and Levchuk are longtime civil rights activists in Ukraine. In 2015, the couple filmed a video for Ukrainian online magazine Bird in Flight, reenacting a recent social experiment conducted in Moscow featuring two young men holding hands as they walked through the city to gauge the public’s reaction. The responses in Kyiv mostly ranged from shrugs to bemusement, until Levchuk sat on Kis’ lap.
A Florida woman is suing the city council that suspended her after her history of obscene, racist and homophobic tweets was uncovered and published in a local paper.
The councilwoman, Judi Fike, was appointed to her seat in Groveland, Florida last year and is running for a full term.
Fike responded to the local paper’s story with an apology “to anyone who was hurt” by the posts, while maintaining that their publication was a timed “political attack” just weeks ahead of her August primary.
“I will not let that tactic work,” she said.
The collection of Fike’s offensive screeds extends back to at least 2015, and reveal deep-seated animus toward Black and LGBTQ+ people.
Just hours after the Pulse nightclub shooting in June 2016 in nearby Orlando, Fike posted to Facebook, “Duh….why would the shooter target a gay club? My answer…Easier than marching them up steps to push off the roof..some sarcasm, some truth…”
In 2015, Fike posted to her “Widow Fike” account on Twitter (now X), “Can we divert our attention back to real news? The #LGBT freak show has had its run.”
Fike owns and operates a catering company called The Black Napkin.
Last week, the city council confronted Fike with the posts in an open meeting, displaying screenshots as Fike watched, the Orlando Sentinel reports.
Groveland Vice Mayor Barbara Gaines, who is Black, said the posts included “racist” portrayals of then-President Barack Obama as a monkey.
“This is a picture of President Ronald Reagan babysitting Barack Obama, except it is an ape, a baboon, a monkey or whatever you call it,” Gaines said.
In several tweets shared at the meeting, Fike obsesses over the word “thug”.
“#thug the new n word,’ she posted in 2015. “Thug life = thug treatment = no pity from me,” she wrote in 2019. In 2022, Fike shared a meme that read, “What’s the magic word to get what you want? Racist!”
Groveland, Florida has a fraught history of racism against Black people. In 1949, false allegations of rape against four black teenagers known as “The Groveland Four” led to the extrajudicial killing of two of the teens and the wrongful imprisonment of two others. They were posthumously pardoned in 2019.
In her defense over the Pulse nightclub post, Fike claimed for council members that her message was about a presidential candidate in 2016 aligning with a community in the Middle East who were “pushing gay individuals off of buildings.”
“It was meant as a support of the community, not against the community,” she said. “It might have been written in poor taste, but I want to clarify that for you because that was going on at the time.”
Fike went further about other posts, denying responsibility altogether.
“Those are indeed manipulated, and so I’ll just let that rest,” she said at the meeting. “They are not my words. Some are, there are some copies, but what Barbara just showed were absolutely not products of mine.”
Council members were not swayed and voted her suspended until an investigation is complete.
Two days later, Fike responded with a lawsuit.
“The city does not have the legal authority to suspend or remove any of its members, period,” said Lake County Commissioner Anthony Sabatini, who is representing Fike. “It just simply does not have that authority. Most cities don’t.”
Groveland Mayor Kevin Keogh said he was more concerned with Fike’s response to the allegations than the resurfaced posts themselves.
“It has to do with the non-truthful nature of your response,” he told Fike, before voting with colleagues to suspend her.
fleeredstates.blog 
You must be logged in to post a comment.