LGBTQ rights update: 2025 tally and 2026 preview

Read more at Erasing 76 Crimes.

Criminalization of gay sex — 2025 tally and 2026 preview

Criminalized Sodomy: Burkina Faso, Trinidad & Tobago

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

Decriminalized Sodomy in Armed Forces: Dominican Republic

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

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

Criminalization Proposed: Niger

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

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

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

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

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

Equal Marriage codified: Guanajuato (Mexico)

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

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

Criminalized Same-Sex Marriage: Burkina Faso

Constitutional Ban on Gay People Adopting: Slovakia

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

Civil Unions Enhanced: Czechia (passed in 2024)

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

Court Challenges for Equal Marriage Pending: Japan, Botswana

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

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

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

Surrogacy Legalized: Western Australia

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Gender Identity Discrimination Ban Ordered by Court: Kenya

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

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

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

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

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

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

Hate Crime Law Proposed: Mexico

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

Blood Donation Ban Ends: Australia

Blood Donation Ban Reinstated: Greece

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

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

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

Freedom of expression and assembly — 2025 tally and 2026 preview

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

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

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

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

Trans-specific issues — 2025 tally and 2026 preview

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

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

Gender Recognition Law Proposed: Costa Rica, Montenegro

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

Non-binary Gender Recognition Proposed: Luxembourg

Legal Gender Change Banned: Slovakia, Peru

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

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

Trans People Banned from Military: USA

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

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

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

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

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

Read more at LGBTQ Nation.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Two ballot initiatives gathering signatures target transgender kids in Colorado

Read more at Colorado Newsline.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

– Cal Solverson, spokesperson for One Colorado

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

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

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

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

Prohibit certain surgeries on minors

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Male and female participation in school sports

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Trans sports ban that could require genital exams will appear on the ballot in Washington

Read more at LGBTQ Nation.

A far-right political action committee says it has collected enough signatures to potentially get a trans sports ban onto Washington state’s ballot in November, and that ban would require girls to undergo physical examinations to participate in school sports.

As the Washington State Standard reports, Let’s Go Washington collected 445,187 signatures in support of Initiative Measure No. IL26-638, exceeding the 386,000 needed to advance the measure. The initiative would ban transgender girls from competing in girls’ school sports statewide

IL26-638 interprets existing state law as requiring students “to undergo a routine physical examination prior to participation in interscholastic sports, which includes documentation of the student’s sex assigned at birth.” It would require school districts and nonprofit entities to “prohibit biologically male students from competing with and against female students in athletic activities with separate classifications for male and female students.”

Under the proposed measure, students who want to participate in girls’ sports would be required to provide “a health examination and consent form or other statement signed by the student’s personal health care provider that verifies the student’s biological sex, relying only on one or more of the following: The student’s reproductive anatomy, genetic makeup, or normal endogenously produced testosterone levels.”

As journalist Erin Reed notes in her newsletter Erin in the Morning, trans sports bans with similar requirements have been highly controversial, as they could potentially result in minors being subjected to invasive physical exams simply to participate in school sports.

Reed cites the failure last March of the so-called Protection of Women and Girls in Sports Act, which would have amended Title IX — the federal civil rights law prohibiting sex discrimination in government-funded schools and education programs — to prohibit schools from allowing trans female athletes to participate in athletic programs or activities “designated for women or girls.” The Congressional Equality Caucus noted that the bill could have forced “any student to answer invasive personal questions about their bodies & face humiliating physical inspections to ‘prove’ that they’re a girl.”

Along with the signatures in support of IL26-638, Let’s Go Washington also submitted 416,201 signatures in support of a measure repealing changes to another of the PAC’s recent initiatives. The Let’s Go Washington-backed Initiative 2081, approved in 2024, codified the rights of the parents of public school students into law. As Reed notes, however, state lawmakers watered down provisions that would have reportedly mandated that schools out trans students to their parents.

According to Reed, Let’s Go Washington’s IL26-001 would restore language to the 2024 parental rights law that would effectively require the forced outing of trans students to their parents.

As the Washington State Standard reports, Let’s Go Washington submitted signatures in support of both measures to the Washington Secretary of State’s office on Friday. The Secretary of State’s office told the outlet that it may take up to four weeks to verify the signatures for the initiatives. Once verified, the initiatives will go before the state legislature, which can either approve them or reject them. If the state legislature rejects them, they will either appear on the November ballot on their own or alongside alternatives proposed by lawmakers.

Brian Heywood, the millionaire hedge fund manager and Republican megadonor who leads Let’s Go Washington, claimed that roughly half of the signatures the PAC had collected in support of the initiatives were from independent voters and Democrats. “This is not a partisan issue, this is a common sense issue,” Heywood said, according to the Standard. “This has broad support.”

However, in a statement issued by WA Families for Freedom, Gender Justice League board member Sophia Lee accused Let’s Go Washington of “playing political games with the lives of vulnerable trans and queer kids.”

Reed, meanwhile, notes that the trans sports ban is likely to face constitutional challenges should it become law. But it’s unclear whether the measure would succeed on the ballot. Reed notes that anti-trans messaging from Republicans last year coincided with significant GOP losses across the country in November’s off-year elections.

2025 LGBTQ rights update: Many bright spots in Asia amid the gloom

Read more at Erasing 76 Crimes.

East and Southeast Asia

Japan: The long slow march to eventual same-sex marriage continued in Japan in 2025, with resolution still looking a year or more away. Three more high courts ruled on the constitutionality of the same-sex marriage ban. Those in Nagoya and Osaka found the ban unconstitutional, but a Tokyo high court ruled it constitutional. Together with three other courts that found the ban unconstitutional, that creates a circuit split that will have to be resolved by the supreme court, where a case has already been filed.

A further case has also been filed to the supreme court by a transgender woman who is seeking to have her legal gender changed without ending her marriage to her wife. Lower courts in Kyoto and Osaka ruled against her this year.

In what’s perhaps a bad sign for all this, the supreme court ruled against a married binational same-sex couple who were seeking a residence visa for the non-Japanese partner.

But that hasn’t stopped other progress on relationship recognition. Following last year’s supreme court ruling that same-sex partners should be entitled to surviving family benefits for victims of crime, the government announced in January that dozens of laws that applied to common-law couples would now apply to same-sex couples. These included domestic violence laws, leases and rents, and disaster support, but excluded over 120 laws such as social security and pensions. And the government proposed an assisted reproduction bill that specifically excludes same-sex couples and bans surrogacy.

And Okinawa prefecture enacted a same-sex partnership registry in 2025, while Nagasaki has announced plans to introduce one in 2026. That’ll bring the total to 32/47 prefectures and more than 500 municipalities representing more than 90% of the population.

Japan elected its first female prime minister this year, and she’s a conservative hardliner who has expressed strong opposition to same-sex marriage, so the odds of legislative advancements look slim for the next few years.

China: The government’s attitude toward the LGBTQ community turned icy again this year, with a deepening crackdown on queer expression, including ordering the removal of gay networking apps from app stores, censorship of foreign films to remove queer characters, and arrests of gay erotica writers.

In Hong Kong, the government failed to meet a court-imposed deadline to enact a civil partnership bill, after the legislature voted down the government’s very weak bill in September by a 71-14 margin. It’s unclear what couples can do from here.

Earlier in the year, a Hong Kong court ruled that banning trans people from using gender appropriate toilets was unconstitutional.

Taiwan: The government introduced bills that would open assisted reproduction to single women and same-sex couples, although it does not include surrogacy, which it says will be considered later.

A lawsuit was filed challenging the surgery requirement to change legal gender.

Taiwan was supposed to host WorldPride this year, but it withdrew back in 2022 when WorldPride ordered that it should not use the name “Taiwan” in the event name. The event was instead held in Washington, DC.

South Korea: A life partnership bill was proposed but has not advanced at all in the legislature. Meanwhile, two couples filed a case at the supreme court seeking same-sex marriage rights. And the government announced it would count same-sex couples as “spouses” in its next census.

The newly appointed minister for gender equality said she would make passing a long-stalled anti-discrimination bill, with protections for LGBT people, a priority. So far, no news on that front.

Thailand: Last year’s same-sex marriage and adoption law came into effect in January 2025, making Thailand the first place in southeast Asia to legalize it. Still, married couples continue to face legal discrimination when it comes to accessing surrogacy and residency permits for binational couples.

But a promised gender recognition law never materialized.

Vietnam: The government cracked down on some gay events this year, following a change in leadership of the Communist Party. Talk of expanding LGBT rights and possible same-sex marriage is likely dead for a while.

A long-stalled gender affirmation bill did not advance in 2025.

The government reduced the number of crimes that are eligible for the death penalty from 18 to 10, which it is explicitly pitching as a step toward abolition.

Indonesia: Multiple raids took plays on gay events and gay bars, in what looks like a deepening crackdown on queer people. A bill was also introduced that would ban LGBTQ behavior online.

Indonesia’s new criminal code moves the death penalty from the primary form of punishment to an alternative punishment, which is a baby step toward abolition.

Malaysia: You guessed it, crackdowns on gay events here, too.

Kelantan state amended its shariah-based criminal code to remove sections on sodomy, which the constitutional court said were redundant considering it’s already covered under federal law.

One bright spot – the government is beginning a study in the new year on full abolition of the death penalty. It took a step toward this in 2023 by abolishing mandatory death penalties from its criminal code.

Singapore: Parliament passed a workplace discrimination law that specifically excludes protections for LGBTQ people.

The high court dismissed an appeal seeking abolition of mandatory death penalties from the criminal code, but plaintiffs have said they will appeal.

Philippines: The supreme court ruled that homosexuality was grounds for annulment of a marriage.

Aklan province passed a non-discrimination ordinance.

Timor-Leste: The country joined the ASEAN bloc, and also the Southeast Asian Nuclear Weapons Free Zone.

Central and South Asia

Kazakhstan: The nation enacted a Russia-inspired “LGBT propaganda” law, which includes punishments of a fine and ten days in prison.

Krygyzstan: The government attempted to reintroduce the death penalty for sex crimes involving children this year – which seems to me like a common pretext for a witch hunt against queer people. Fortunately, the president submitted the proposed constitutional amendments to the constitutional court, which ruled that they were unconstitutional, as the current constitution explicitly prohibits reintroducing the death penalty, and doing so would violate Kyrgyzstan’s obligations under international treaties it has signed.

Kyrgyzstan also signed, but has not ratified the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons.

Afghanistan: In July, the International Criminal Court issued warrants for two Taliban leaders for their alleged crimes against women, girls, and the LGBTQ community – the first time the ICC has sought warrants for crimes against LGBTQ people.

Pakistan: The government introduced a bill to eliminate the death penalty for two crimes, part of an association agreement with the European Union.

India: The central government took steps to ensure equality for same-sex couples under a number of laws and programs – though it still opposes same-sex marriage. The government was ordered to review all laws and promote equality when the supreme court shot down a marriage case in 2023. The court also considered and refused a petition to revisit that decision this year. Still, lots of other laws are being challenged in the courts by queer couples, including a domestic violence law which is phrased such that it only applies to husband-and-wife pairs, and equal income tax treatment.

Also this year, the court directed the government to review how it is implementing rights for trans people and to review sex education to ensure it is inclusive. A separate case was filed at the supreme court seeking distinct legal recognition for intersex people, as apart from transgender people. The high court of Andra Pradesh state ruled that transgender women are women under domestic violence law. The Kerala high court ruled that the state must issue a birth certificate to a child of a trans person that identifies its parents as “parents,” not “mother and father.” A judge in Madras ruled that same-sex couples have a right to a family life together, and cannot be forcibly separated by disapproving parents.

Karnataka state passed a hate crime and hate speech law that includes protections for LGBT people, and issued new regulations banning anti-LGBTQ discrimination in child protection services. Tamil Nadu state has made LGBTQ sensitivity training mandatory for all doctors.

Bangladesh: I must’ve edited a dozen or more stories about violent attacks on queer people in Bangladesh at 76crimes.com this year.

Bhutan: The government issued a set of film regulations that includes a prohibition on incitement to hatred or violence based on sexual orientation or gender.

Nepal: We still haven’t gotten a final decision from the supreme court on same-sex marriage, but the leading LGBT organization has counted 17 same-sex couples who’ve gotten married in the country since the 2023 ruling legalized it. Nevertheless, Wikipedia editors continue to claim that Nepal is not a same-sex marriage country.

The first gender-affirming surgery was performed in the country in June, and it is now considered available there.

Sri Lanka: There has been no progress on a bill to decriminalize gay sex – and the local Catholic bishop is whipping up conspiracy-based opposition to it. Last year, the island passed a Women Empowerment Act that included a prohibition on discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity.

Middle East

Israel: Well, at least the war in Gaza has mostly cooled down this year, although it’s clear that the suffering continues and it looks like we’ve just reached a pause in hostilities rather than a cessation.

On LGBT issues, Israel registered its first adoption by a same-sex couple in January. Same-sex adoption had been legal on paper for years, but in practice, the administration threw up so many roadblocks, it couldn’t happen until a supreme court ruling last year ordered the government to stop putting same-sex couples at the back of the adoption queue.

The opposition brought a bill to create civil (secular) marriage (including same-sex marriage) and a couples registry to a vote in the Knesset last week, but despite getting some cross-party support, it failed to pass.

Israel is expected to go to vote on a new Knesset by October 2026, and polling is currently very tight between the government and opposition blocs, but ten months is a long time in Israeli politics. While we can all hope that Netanyahu and his allies are given a thumping defeat next year – anything would be better than this government’s record on Palestinian and LGBTQ rights – the opposition may not be able to deliver same-sex marriage, as its current leading figure has stated his opposition to it in the past.

Lebanon: The state ratified the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.

Oman: The country ratified the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, effective Feb 2026. This is a pretty major development, as international jurisprudence holds that the ICCPR requires decriminalization of sodomy.

NYC to distribute $2 million in emergency funding to organizations serving transgender people

Read more at Gay City News.

With less than 48 hours remaining in office, outgoing Mayor Eric Adams rolled out a plan to distribute $2 million in what the city is describing as “emergency funding” to 20 organizations serving transgender, gender non-conforming, and non-binary individuals in a bid to counteract federal budget cuts.

The Department of Health and Mental Hygiene will administer the funding across organizations delivering the most pressing community services, including in the areas of health and wellness, legal advocacy, youth and family support, safety and crisis response, community building, and economic empowerment, according to the mayor’s office.

Organizations are eligible to receive up to $92,000, which can be used for staff, travel, supplies, and services — so long as most of the clients are transgender, gender non-conforming, or non-binary.

Organizations seeking to apply for the grant must fill out an application by Monday, Jan. 5 at 5 p.m.

CitizensNYC, a non-profit which helps cut through red tape and act as an intermediary between the city and applicants to disburse city funding to various organizations in a timely manner, is partnering with the city to help facilitate the funding, though the city will ultimately determine which organizations receive it.

The funding follows a tumultuous year during which the Trump administration repeatedly moved to slash funding for LGBTQ community services in New York City and elsewhere.

After President Donald Trump issued several executive orders early this year targeting funding for LGBTQ organizations and other groups, federal agencies warned non-profits that their budgets could be slashed if they served transgender individuals or conducted what officials described as “equity-related” work. Lambda Legal, which led a lawsuit against the Trump administration in February, later won a court order restoring $6 million in funding for nine nonprofits serving LGBTQ people and individuals living with HIV.

In September, the Trump administration announced it was cancelling around $36 million in funding for the city as punishment for its policies protecting transgender individuals — a move that prompted the city to sue the Trump administration.

Most recently, the Trump administration issued multiple proposed rules that would require healthcare providers participating in Medicare and Medicaid programs to stop providing gender-affirming care for youth.

“We saw a need after federal budget cuts, and we are responding to it,” First Deputy Mayor Randy Mastro said in a written statement. “There are essential services at stake for this community. Therefore, it was an imperative for us to take action and fill that need.”

In a written statement, Adams said the city is “putting our money where our values are and stepping up to serve those who need our care.”

Dr. Michelle Morse, the acting city health commissioner, said the federal government’s attacks on trans and gender non-conforming individuals are “unconscionable.”

“Supporting New York’s community organizations that provide lifesaving services and are eligible for the emergency funds is a key part of the Health Department’s commitment to supporting the health and well-being of all New Yorkers,” Morse explained.

The mayor’s announcement comes roughly three months after Adams sparked widespread criticism when he attacked trans-inclusive bathroom policies in a series of comments. At the time, Adams said he opposed what he described as “girls and boys using the same restroom,” saying he would evaluate his “authority” to change laws on that issue, but ultimately conceded he lacked the power to do so.

Texas unveils “tip line” to report & send pictures of suspected trans women using the restroom

Read more at LGBTQ Nation.

Texas’ virulently anti-trans attorney general, Ken Paxton (R), has launched a tip line that allows people to report on suspected trans people they believe are violating the state’s new bathroom ban.

In a statement announcing the tip line, Paxton said the Texas Women’s Privacy Act – which requires people in public buildings to use bathrooms based on sex assigned at birth – “was passed to ensure that women and girls in Texas are protected from mentally ill men wanting to violate their basic right to privacy.”

“It’s absolute insanity that action like this is even needed,” he claimed, “but unfortunately, in the day and age of radical leftism, it is.”

In reality, research has shown no evidence that allowing trans women access to single-sex spaces like bathrooms poses a safety risk to cisgender women.

In fact, forcing trans people to use facilities that do not align with their gender identity can result in “high rates of harassment and violence against transgender people as well as cisgender people, particularly women who do not conform to traditional ideas of femininity,” according to the Movement Advancement Project. A 2021 study from UCLA’s Williams Institute found that trans people are four times more likely than cis people to be victims of violent crime.

Nevertheless, the enactment of the legislation marks the culmination of a 10-year effort by Texas Republicans. The law does not allow an individual to be punished or fined by the state; rather, it fines the institution that allowed the infraction $25,000, plus an additional $125,000 per day for additional violations.

The law also requires the attorney general’s office to investigate complaints, but first, complaints must be filed with the accused agency. “Together, we will uproot and bring justice to any state agency or political subdivision that opens the door for men to violate women’s privacy, dignity, and safety,” Paxton said.

Paxton’s tip line requires folks to submit the original complaint that was filed with the accused agency in addition to filling out the online form and providing “evidence” that a trans person used the restroom. Perhaps most concerning, it also includes an option to submit up to five photos, even though taking pictures in restrooms is illegal.

Brian Klosterboer, senior staff attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union of Texas, said the tip line “wrongly encourages Texans to violate each other’s privacy in bathrooms.”

“The Attorney General has tried for years to vilify and dehumanize transgender Texans,” Klosterboer said, “but he can’t strip away every person’s right to privacy and right to live our lives free from gender stereotyping.”

Critics of the law have worried that it will spark violent over-policing by the institutions at risk of these massive fines. This policing will affect both trans and cis people who don’t fit strict gender norms.

The law has already been used in ways that lawmakers may not have intended. Students at the University of Texas San Antonio (UTSA), for example, are being forced out of their current dorm rooms and made to relocate because of the ban.

At UTSA, mixed-gender dorms include pairs of rooms separated by a shared bathroom; often, those rooms are occupied by people of different genders. Any students sharing a bathroom between their rooms with someone of a different sex assigned at birth are being forcibly rehoused to comply with the new law.

On December 6, transgender protestors with a group called the 6W Project visited the Texas Capitol and attempted to use the restrooms that aligned with their gender identities to make a point about the lack of enforcement mechanisms in the law.

At first, they easily entered the bathrooms of their choice, then proceeded to give speeches in the Capitol Rotunda, The Texas Tribune reported. But when they attempted to use the restrooms a second time, officers stopped them and asked to see their IDs.

Officers claimed in a statement that the ID requests were voluntary, though those who did not show their IDs were barred from entering the bathroom. The officers did allow two trans women with female markers on their IDs to enter the women’s restrooms. Officers also reportedly only guarded the women’s restroom and not the men’s.

“I think that the Texas government just established that they have no consistent enforceable standards for this law,” protester Matilda Miller told the Texas Tribune.

“What we did was not radical, it was not profound,” added 6W Project co-founder Ry Vazquez. “People use the restroom every day in a public setting, and for it to become what it is now, where it is now an active threat to someone who is not prepared, is utterly abysmal.”

Texas is making a list of transgender Texans. It’s using driver’s licenses to help

Read more at Houston Public Media.

The state of Texas has continued collecting information on transgender drivers seeking to change the sex listed on their licenses, creating a list of more than 100 people in one year.

According to internal documents The Texas Newsroom obtained through records requests, the Texas Department of Public Safety has amassed a list of 110 people who tried to update their gender between August 2024 and August 2025. Employees with driver’s license offices across the state, from El Paso to Paris to Plano, reported the names and license numbers of these people to a special agency email account. Identifying information was redacted from the records released to The Texas Newsroom.

The data was collected after Texas stopped allowing drivers to update the gender on their licenses unless it was to fix a clerical error. It is unclear what the state is doing with this information.

An agency spokesperson did not respond to questions about why the list was created and whether it was shared with any other agencies or state officials. The Texas Newsroom filed records requests in an attempt to find the answers but did not receive any additional information that sheds light on what the state may be doing with these names.

In recent years, GOP lawmakers have passed multiple laws restricting the rights of transgender Texans, including two new measures that went into effect this year.

One defines “male” and “female” on state documents as being based on a person’s reproductive system. The other, known as the “bathroom bill,” bars governments from allowing people to use a restroom at public buildings, parks or libraries that do not match their sex at birth.

While it’s unclear how the state plans to enforce the bathroom bill, transgender activist Ry Vazquez told KUT News she was asked to show her ID before using a restroom in the state Capitol earlier this month. Vazquez said she and three other people were then cited with criminal trespassing and banned from the building for a year.

Landon Richie, the policy coordinator with the Transgender Education Network of Texas, is concerned that the list the state is keeping will be used to pass more state laws targeting the rights of transgender Texans.

“The state collecting this information raises a lot of red flags, not just in terms of people’s privacy and ability to exist not under a magnifying glass,” he said. He added that he wonders “how this information will be leveraged in terms of drafting and crafting additional legislation” to chip away at the civil rights and freedoms of transgender Texans.

There are roughly 161,000 transgender adults living in Texas, or less than 1% of the population, according to the Williams Institute at the UCLA School of Law.

For years, transgender people in Texas could update their state IDs to match their gender identity by obtaining a court order and then submitting this document to the state agencies that issue driver’s licenses and birth certificates. After the state restricted updates to driver’s licenses last fall, the state’s health agency followed suit, blocking changes to birth certificates other than to correct hospital errors or omissions.

In March, The Texas Newsroom reported that the state was collecting information on people who continued to ask for these changes despite the policy shift.

The attorney general, whose office determines what records are public, allowed the agency to keep other documents about the policy shift secret. But it did release a list of the four employees with access to the special email account.

The Texas Newsroom also obtained records that show the agency investigated threats against the driver’s license division chief after news of the policy change was made public. But no case was referred to the Travis County Attorney’s Office for prosecution.

The Texas Newsroom has requested an updated version of the list.

North Carolina county dissolves library board for refusing to toss book about a trans kid

Read more at The Advocate.

A county government in central North Carolina has dissolved its entire public library board after trustees voted to keep a children’s picture book about a transgender character on library shelves, turning a local book challenge into one of the most severe reprisals yet in the national campaign against LGBTQ-inclusive materials.

The Randolph County Board of Commissioners voted 3–2 last week to dismiss all members of the county library board, weeks after trustees declined to move or remove Call Me Max, a picture book about a transgender boy who asks his teacher to use his chosen name. The decision followed a public hearing that drew nearly 200 residents and revealed a community split almost evenly between those calling for the board’s removal and those urging commissioners to respect the library’s review process.

Library staff and trustees had reviewed the complaint earlier this fall and, in October, voted to keep the book in the children’s section, concluding it complied with the county’s collection policies, local CBS affiliate WFMY reported. Commissioners nonetheless moved to dissolve the nine-member board outright — a step allowed under North Carolina law but rarely taken.

Free-expression advocates said the action represents a dramatic escalation in the political response to book challenges. Kasey Meehan, director of the Freedom to Read program at PEN America, told The Washington Post that Randolph County’s decision is among the harshest penalties she has seen imposed over a single title.

“It’s a pretty dramatic response to wanting to have diverse and inclusive books on shelves,” Meehan said.

Opponents of the book claimed the dispute was a matter of child protection. Tami Fitzgerald, executive director of the conservative North Carolina Values Coalition, which urged supporters to attend the commission meeting, argued that Call Me Max teaches children that their parents may be “wrong” about their gender.

The book has been banned by several school districts and was prominently invoked by Republican Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis in 2022 while promoting his so-called “don’t say gay” legislation restricting classroom discussions of gender identity, a law later challenged in court.

To critics, the Randolph County episode demonstrates how procedural safeguards are increasingly overridden when LGBTQ+ inclusion is at stake. Kyle Lukoff, the book’s author, who is a trans man, said the case is especially troubling because the library followed its own policies and was still punished.

“Policies can be helpful, but this is ultimately a question of power,” Lukoff told The Post. “If there are people in power who believe trans people don’t belong in their communities or the world at large, they will twist those policies to make it a reality.”

Randolph County, home to about 150,000 people, voted nearly four to one for President Donald Trump. Commissioners have not announced when or how they plan to reconstitute the library board.

Colorado state sports association settles lawsuit by allowing schools to ban trans athletes

Read more at LGBTQ Nation.

The Colorado High School Activities Association (CHSAA) has settled a lawsuit brought by right-wing school districts for the right for schools to bar trans students from joining sports teams that align with their gender. The lawsuit targeted multiple defendants and will continue with the remaining ones without CHSAA’s involvement.

“Eligibility decisions have always been left to individual schools and districts, which is why being named in this lawsuit was both frustrating and unnecessary,” a CHSAA spokesperson said in a statement. She went on to call the organization’s inclusion in the lawsuit “much more performative than substantive.” 

The lawsuit was brought by several school districts but was led by District 49. That district’s board passed a controversial trans sports ban back in May by a narrow margin. The lawsuit against the state was filed the day after the policy was voted in, calling for Colorado to allow the ban to be enacted and to align policies with the demands laid out in the president’s “two sexes” executive order.

Colorado has state laws prohibiting discrimination against trans people, specifically people’s gender identity or gender expression. While the lawsuit cites the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment in arguing that trans girls playing on the girls’ team affects the rights of cis girls, it does not mention the impact on the rights of trans girls.

To settle their part of the lawsuit, CHSAA agreed not to sanction the districts and schools named in the lawsuit for banning trans students from sports teams. It will also not respond to statements the schools make about “advantages of biological males over biological females in competitive sports” or potential propaganda about the hazards of “allowing biological males to play contact sports with or against biological females.” There will also be no penalties from CHSAA for forfeiting against a team because they allow trans children to play.

CSHAA has said that it will still sanction the schools and districts if any of those statements are demeaning in nature or call for violence against trans people. The organization is also recouping $60,000 in legal and operational fees.

While some Colorado school districts specifically allow trans students to play sports under their correct gender identity, others have no concrete rules about it. CSHAA has never stepped in over a trans person being allowed to play school sports, or not being able to.

The lawsuit will continue with the Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser and other Colorado Civil Rights Division officials as the remaining defendants.

Colorado’s District 49 has around 27,000 students. In May, Board President Lori Thompson noted that, as far as she was aware, the district had only had one instance of a trans student trying to join a sports team that aligned with their gender identity. The student in question was a trans boy, and they did not pass tryouts.

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑