‘Where am I safe?’: U.K. court ruling leaves trans people’s lives in turmoil

Read more at NBC News.

Nate Rae had always felt secure living openly since coming out as a transgender man in his late 20s — until a recent U.K. Supreme Court ruling on the legal definition of biological sex changed everything.

Now, Rae — a PhD student and science communicator who grew up in a small Scottish town before moving to London — says he finds himself constantly weighing risks and assessing where it is safe — or unsafe — for him to be.

In April, the court affirmed that under equality laws, the term “sex” refers to biological sex, meaning a transgender woman is legally considered male, and a transgender man is considered female.

Equality watchdog EHRC stated in its interim guidance on the ruling’s practical implications that transgender people should be barred from facilities and services, from toilets to hospital wards and refuges, designed for the gender they live as.

“It’s almost like it’s been made legal to harass trans people,” Rae, 33, told Reuters in an interview at Gay’s The Word, Britain’s oldest LGBTQ bookshop, saying he was now “hyper aware” of people noticing him.

“I’ve got to factor in things that I’d never had to factor in before,” he said. “Where can I go? Where am I safe?”

Transgender rights flashpoint

Rae, who only started to medically transition last year, often uses the women’s bathroom as he feels he is still largely perceived as female.

Since the ruling, Rae has been told several times that he cannot use a certain bathroom and has been called “disgusting” when using a female toilet. On one occasion, someone approached him to ask: “Do you know there are kids here?”

Transgender rights have become a political flashpoint in Britain and elsewhere. In the U.S., President Donald Trump has targeted the rights of transgender people in a series of executive orders.

Some critics of the policies say the conservative right has weaponized identity politics to attack minority groups.

But others argue that support for transgender people has infringed on the rights of biological women and their safety in spaces such as hospitals, prisons and domestic violence refuges.

Britain’s government said the judgement brought clarity and a clear position to underpin gender policies, but for many transgender people, including Rae, it has left them feeling excluded from parts of society.

A report released in August by transgender rights group TransActual highlighted how, since the ruling, some trans people have planned to leave the country, concealed their identities, avoided public spaces like hospitals, felt outed at work, or have withdrawn from social life altogether.

Asked about the detrimental impacts of the ruling cited by transgender people, a government spokesperson said laws were in place to protect trans individuals from discrimination and harassment.

Young trans people ‘terrified’

Following a consultation, the EHRC, which is responsible for enforcing equality laws, submitted its updated draft guidance to the government at the start of September and parliament is expected to consider it by the end of the year.

Keyne Walker, strategy director for TransActual, said the interim guidance is already having a “dire effect” and said the EHRC’s interpretation of the judgement could have been far less “extreme”.

Some organizations have already updated their transgender policies. The Football Association has barred transgender women from competing in women’s soccer in England, and the British Transport Police now requires same-sex searches in custody to be conducted according to a detainee’s biological sex.

A spokesperson for the EHRC said everything they had done since the judgement was grounded in the law, and the guidance shared with the government was both legally accurate and clear.

Rae fears the court’s decision will discourage people from living freely in their chosen gender and threatens their safety if they do, as it has shifted public perceptions of transgender people.

“Every young trans person I’ve spoken to is terrified,” said Rae, who teaches science to young people as part of his job, adding that many were now questioning: “Am I going to be able to live the life I want to live as the person I want to be?”

Appeals court rules for Colorado and LGBTQ rights and against Catholic parishes in state preschool case

Read more at KUNC.

Preschoolers with LGBTQ parents or who identify as LGBTQ can’t be shut out of religious preschools that are part of Colorado’s state-funded preschool program, a federal appeals court ruled Tuesday.

The decision, which upholds a key part of a lower court decision, represents a major win for the state and a defeat for the two Denver-area Catholic preschools at the center of the case.

Tuesday’s decision provides the latest answer to a question being asked in several cases percolating in state and federal courts: Can private religious schools that accept public education dollars refuse to enroll certain kids based on religious principles?

Along with the 10th Circuit Court of Appeal, a Maine federal district court and a Utah state court are among those who have said no.

It’s possible the U.S. Supreme Court could eventually weigh in, though it’s not clear which case will advance to the high court.

In its 54-page ruling, the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals wrote that it found no proof that the Colorado Department of Early Childhood took actions that “evidence religious hostility” as the two Catholic preschools claimed.

The state’s universal preschool program “went to great effort to be welcoming and inclusive of faith-based preschools’ participation,” the decision said.

The three-judge panel also found that the early childhood department, which runs the preschool program, had applied its nondiscrimination policy in a neutral way to both religious and non-religious preschools.

The policy bars preschools from discriminating based on a variety of factors, including sexual orientation and gender identity. State officials cited the policy in denying the Catholic preschools a waiver that would have allowed them to keep LGBTQ children or children from LGBTQ families from enrolling.

In a statement Tuesday, Gov. Jared Polis said, “We are building a Colorado for all, where every student is free from discrimination and this voter-approved initiative continues to enroll approximately 70% of all eligible four-year-olds each school year and many faith based and secular providers are operating terrific preschools that serve parents and children well.”

Tuesday’s ruling essentially upholds the status quo in the universal preschool program, meaning that participating preschools can’t shut out LGBTQ children or children with LGBTQ parents.

The three appeals court judges who ruled Tuesday were Gregory Phillips, Veronica Rossman, and Richard Federico. Phillips was appointed by President Barack Obama, and Rossman and Federico were appointed by President Joe Biden.

Nick Reaves, senior counsel at The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, which is representing the Catholic preschools in the case, sent Chalkbeat a short statement about the ruling.

“Colorado is punishing religious schools and the families they serve for following their faith. The Tenth Circuit’s decision allows the state’s anti-religious gamesmanship to continue. We will keep fighting to ensure that every preschooler in Colorado can access quality, affordable education.”

Conflict arose as state preschool program rolled out

The Colorado case began in 2023 as the state was launching its new universal preschool program, which provides tuition-free preschool to 4-year-olds statewide. The $349 million program serves more than 40,000 children and allows families to choose from public, private, or religious preschools.

Of more than 2,000 preschools participating in the program this year, about 40 are religious.

St. Mary Catholic Virtue School in Littleton and Wellspring Catholic Academy in Lakewood wanted to join the program when it started, but didn’t want to admit LGBTQ children or children from LGBTQ families.

They asked for an exemption from state rules banning discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity, but the Colorado Department of Early Childhood refused. The two preschools never joined the program, and in August 2023, the parishes that ran the preschools sued the state. (Wellspring Catholic Academy closed in December 2024.)

In June 2024, a federal district court judge appointed by President Jimmy Carter largely ruled in the state’s favor.

He wrote of Colorado’s non-discrimination rules: “The purpose of the requirement is not to invade religious freedom but to further the implementation of a strongly embraced public value.”

The parishes quickly appealed.

Unfolding alongside the Catholic preschool case is a separate lawsuit over universal preschool brought by an evangelical Christian preschool in southern Colorado. Unlike the Catholic preschools, that school, Darren Patterson Christian Academy, joined the universal preschool program when it launched.

While officials there never sought to keep LGBTQ children or families out, their lawsuit said state non-discrimination rules could force the preschool to hire employees who don’t share its faith or to change school policies related to restrooms, pronouns, and dress codes.

In February, a federal judge appointed by Donald Trump ruled in favor of Darren Patterson Christian Academy.

The state appealed the ruling in March. The case is ongoing.

Kansas Supreme Court Delivers Big Win For Driver’s License Gender Markers

Read more at Erin in the Morning.

After a grueling two-year fight, starting on Tuesday, the Kansas Department of Revenue (KDOR) will resume issuing accurate driver’s licenses to transgender Kansans, a spokesperson for the ACLU of Kansas told Erin in the Morning.

Last week, the Kansas Supreme Court declined to hear Attorney General Kris Kobach’s request to uphold a district court order preventing the state from updating IDs for trans residents. And while there is still a fight ahead, it marks a notable victory for trans people in a state that has been holding their driver’s licenses hostage for years.

“I want every transgender Kansan to be able to live their lives authentically,” said Kathryn Redman, a 65-year-old resident and a plaintiff in the case, Kansas v. Harper, brought on by the ACLU and Stinson LLP.

AG Kobach asserted that the courts needed to put a stop to the license updates indefinitely, claiming it would interfere with law enforcement’s ability to identify and apprehend criminal suspects. The Court of Appeals called this “mere speculation.”

“There is no hidden agenda,” Redman told Erin in the Morning. “All I tried to accomplish and what I have accomplished by my transition is, I now live my life at peace with myself.”

In theory, the case should now be returned to a new trial court for final resolution. But the conservative Kobach doesn’t want to let that happen. He and other Republican officials have sought to call a special legislative session on the matter—a process they were already undertaking in a transparent attempt at gerrymandering, and it has seen renewed fanfare in light of the court events this past week.

The fight to strip trans Kansans of their rights, state Senate President Ty Masterson wrote in an Oct. 1 letter, is considered “even more important than redistricting.” He called on the Kansas State Republican Caucus to simply “add a few words” to state law to stop Kansans from updating their gender markers.

The legal proceedings have ricocheted from court to court since July 2023, when legislators overrode Democratic Governor Laura Kelly’s veto on Senate Bill 180. The anti-trans law takes after legislation proposed by right-wing, anti-trans organizations, misleadingly dubbed the “Women’s Bill of Rights.” In practice, the only thing the bill does is codify sex segregation and target the equal rights of transgender people. It makes no mention of forcing Kansans to carry a driver’s license with an inaccurate gender marker.

“Rather than accepting the decisions of the two highest courts in our state, Mr. Kobach is resorting to backroom attempts to change the law and shut the courts out of our government so he can have full, unchecked power,” Micah Kubic, executive director of the ACLU of Kansas, said in a statement. “This is, simply put, a power grab by the attorney general that goes beyond his baseline of cheap political theater and wasteful litigation.”

Kubic denounced Kobach’s “extremist and discriminatory agenda,” adding that it “threatens not just the privacy and agency of all Kansans but also the very checks and balances of our state government.”

Judge ends Arizona’s “irrational” policy requiring surgery for updating gender markers

Read more at LGBTQ Nation.

A federal judge in Arizona has ruled that transgender people are no longer required to get gender-affirming surgeries in order to update their birth certificates to align with their gender identity. The Arizona Department of Health Services has 120 days to comply with the ruling.

“We are grateful that the Court ruled in Plaintiffs’ favor and found that this outdated requirement violated Plaintiffs’ constitutional rights,” said Rachel Berg, a staff attorney for the National Center for LGBTQ Rights (NCLR), which filed the case on behalf of four trans youths. “We are thrilled that the Arizona Department of Health Services will be permanently enjoined from enforcing this irrational and overly burdensome requirement, and Plaintiffs will be able to amend their birth certificates to reflect who they are.”

The ruling instructs the Arizona Department of Health Services to ignore the state’s law that requires proof of surgery to be able to amend gender markers on a birth certificate. A correction of one’s gender marker on the document still requires a doctor to attest that the patient is living as a different gender from the one assigned at birth.

The Arizona Attorney General’s Office represented the state health department. The office told the Arizona Daily Star that they are studying the ruling while deciding whether to launch an appeal on the matter.

In August last year, the same federal judge, James Soto (who was appointed by former President Barack Obama), made a similar ruling recommending that the Department of Health Services reconsider the surgical requirement for amending a birth certificate.

Soto highlighted that the requirement risked forcing trans people into unnecessary surgeries in order to live authentically or risk outing themselves in potentially dangerous situations. After a failure to act from the Department of Health Services, this week’s ruling from Judge Soto takes the matter out of their hands.

Earlier this year, Arizona Republicans tried to pass legislation to ban gender marker changes on trans people’s birth certificates entirely. While that bill passed both the state’s House and Senate, it was vetoed by Democratic Gov. Katie Hobbs.

The governor upheld her promise to veto any anti-trans bills that made it to her desk, saying the legislature should “focus on real issues that matter and impact people’s everyday lives.”

If the Arizona ruling withstands an appeal, it’ll leave only 10 states that require proof of surgery for trans people to correct their birth certificate gender markers. However, several states still refuse to allow trans people to update their gender markers in any way.

The requirement for trans people to receive surgery to update their gender markers is discriminatory, can force people to have surgeries they don’t want, and can cause particular issues for minors who cannot access gender-affirming care.

As Soto noted in his 2024 ruling, “Not every transgender person needs surgery to complete a gender transition. Starting social transitioning and other recommended therapy may eliminate the need for any potential surgical intervention.”

These requirements can mean that minors, regardless of whether they wish to pursue gender-affirming surgeries later in life, are stuck for many years with documentation that includes an incorrect marker. That can lead to situations where a trans person is forced to out themselves, which — aside from being mentally damaging — can also put them at risk for physical harm, given the current climate towards trans people.

In a statement, NCLR noted, “For young people, their birth certificate impacts everything from school records to camp registration. ”

Finally, in most cases the surgeries required for a trans person to update their birth certificate in these states result in sterilization. That forces them to either give up on having biological kids one day, go through expensive processes to preserve their sperm or eggs, or requires them to put off updating their documents until after having children.

Anti-LGBTQ+ GOP lawmaker is trying to rename Harvey Milk Blvd. for Charlie Kirk

Read more at LGBTQ Nation.

A Republican legislator in Utah is trying to change a road named for civil rights leader Harvey Milk so that it honors anti-LGBTQ+ MAGA podcaster Charlie Kirk.

Milk, a San Francisco city councilmember in the 1970s, was one of the first out LGBTQ+ people elected to public office and was integral in leading the fight against California’s Briggs Initiative, which would have banned gay people from being teachers. Kirk spoke out against LGBTQ+ rights and said that it was “God’s perfect law” that called for people to stone gay people to death. Both of them were shot to death.

Utah Rep. Trevor Lee (R) introduced a bill to change Salt Lake City’s Harvey Milk Blvd to “Charlie Kirk Blvd” earlier this week.

In an interview with ABC4, Lee claimed that the only reason he chose Harvey Milk Blvd to be renamed – and not any other road in the state – was because Milk was from California. Kirk was from Arizona but was died in Orem, Utah.

“From the vast majority of Utahns, they would say that Harvey Milk does not have any connection to Utah whatsoever,” Lee said about his bill. “But Charlie Kirk does now, especially after being assassinated in the state of Utah.”

ABC 4 noted that Harvey Milk Blvd. isn’t a state road and that the city government is in charge of naming it, which could mean that the state legislature doesn’t have the authority to rename it.

Lee has a long history of anti-LGBTQ+ legislation. He introduced a bill earlier this year to ban Pride flags in government buildings. His bill would have allowed Nazi and Confederate flags because, he argued, those are “historic,” while it would ban the rainbow flag.

Also this year, Lee threatened to withdraw state funding from the state’s NHL team, the Utah Mammoths, because the team posted a rainbow-colored version of its logo for Pride Month and wrote “Happy Pride” on social media.

“Utahns overwhelmingly don’t support pride month,” Lee said at the time. Lee has not cited any proof for his ability to speak for the “vast majority” of people in his state. He represents Utah House of Representatives District 16, a district of around 40,000 inhabitants that includes parts of Layton.

In 2022, Lee said on a podcast that Utah Gov. Spencer Cox (R) “might even be transgender because he’s all for everything they say and do.” Cox is not transgender and has signed anti-trans legislation.

“Was that before or after he vetoed a bill for tr***ies?” Lee said, using an anti-trans slur.

Lee then claimed to speak for Black people, saying that “a lot of my friends who are Black, they’d be like, yeah, man, I don’t agree with all that LGBTQ stuff.”

“I’m like, that’s embarrassing. I wouldn’t want to be associated with those people,” Lee said.

He said that it was “crazy white liberals who do not have another purpose in life” who need to stop supporting LGBTQ+ rights and “start families and make babies.”

That same year, the Salt Lake Tribune found that Lee was running a secret account on Twitter to attack LGBTQ+ people while posting imagery associated with the “DezNat” or “Deseret Nation” movement, a rightwing movement that advocates for a Mormon, white ethnostate. The movement is not supported by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

“Yes, than our spineless governor can stop acting like he needs to let transsexuals destroy our girls in sports,” he wrote on that account in one post.

In another post, he shared a meme that accused LGBTQ+ teachers of trying to turn kids transgender, a rightwing myth used to advocate banning LGBTQ+ people and allies from being teachers.

In 2021, he posted that a meme calling Pride Month “Satanic” was “amazing.”

“Doing things that are explicit, you know, people that are topless, that are running around in underwear and they have children there,” Lee said in an interview at the time about Pride. “Yeah, I think that’s satanic. I think that’s horrible.”

Lee also said that “teachers should be paid less not more” with the hashtag “#deznat.”

Canada Updates U.S. Travel Warning for LGBTQ+ Individuals

Read more at Travel Market Report.

Canada has updated its travel advisory for the U.S. to warn LGBTQ+ travelers of increased scrutiny while crossing the border.

On Sept. 29, 2025, the Government of Canada revised its travel advisory for Canadians entering the United States. The updates include new details for entry and exit requirements regarding passports, visas, and U.S. permanent residents, as well as changes to law and culture that could impact 2SLGBTQI+ persons.

The new advisory cautions that U.S. immigration authorities may reevaluate visa status or residency eligibility in some cases, particularly for those with prior violations or irregularities. It also highlights potential challenges for travelers whose passport gender markers — such as Canada’s “X” designation — may not be recognized in U.S. federal systems, which are reportedly transitioning to require sex assigned at birth in some documentation.

“While the Government of Canada issues passports with a “X” gender identifier, it cannot guarantee your entry or transit through other countries,” the advisory warns. “You might face entry restrictions in countries that do not recognize the “X” gender identifier. Before you leave, verify this information with the closest foreign representative for your destination.” 

According to the updated advisory: “Federal systems in the U.S. are changing to no longer accept markers of gender identity. Sex assigned at birth may now be requested by federal forms and processes, including:

  • visa applications
  • NEXUS applications
  • passenger manifests
  • passport applications
  • Social Security applications

“Laws also vary by state and municipality. Some states have enacted laws affecting 2SLGBTQI+ persons. Check relevant state and local laws.”

LGBTQ advocates warn of FBI plan to label trans people as ‘violent extremists’

Read more at the Washington Blade.

The nation’s leading LGBTQ advocacy groups are sounding the alarm over reports that the FBI may soon classify transgender people as a threat group — a move advocates say would be unconstitutional, dangerous, and rooted in political retribution.

At a joint press briefing held over Zoom last week, the heads of the Human Rights Campaign, Transgender Law Center, Equality Federation, GLAAD, PFLAG, and the Southern Poverty Law Center condemned the possibility that the FBI, in coordination with the Heritage Foundation, is working to designate transgender people as “violent extremists.”

The warning comes after a story earlier this month by independent journalist Ken Klippenstein, who reported that two anonymous national security officials said the FBI is considering treating trans subjects as a subset of its new threat category. That classification — originally created under the Biden administration as “Anti-Authority and Anti-Government Violent Extremists” (AGAAVE) — was first applied to Jan. 6 rioters and other right-wing extremists.

After pardoning all of the Jan. 6 insurrectionists, the Trump administration shifted the FBI’s terminology, replacing AGAAVE with “Nihilistic Violent Extremists (NVEs),” or, in some cases, “Transgender Ideology-Inspired Violent Extremism (TIVE).” The possibility of such a label follows several high-profile media errors in which reporters incorrectly linked Charlie Kirk’s shooter to the transgender community, fueling anti-trans rhetoric on the far-right.

For more than an hour last Wednesday, LGBTQ leaders denounced the reported FBI proposal and warned of the consequences of targeting one of the country’s most vulnerable communities. They emphasized that such a move would represent a violation of basic human rights, further fuel misinformation, and give legitimacy to political attacks already directed at transgender people.

Kelley Robinson, president of the Human Rights Campaign, warned of the broader danger for the LGBTQ community if this happens.

“Americans can no longer count on the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, not when political violence runs rampant, not when political retribution goes unchecked, not when hate is being incited by our president.”

Robinson argued that claims of “Transgender Ideology-Inspired Violent Extremism” are not rooted in reality. For example, Gun Violence Archive Executive Director Mark Bryant has said that out of 5,000 mass shootings tracked by the archive, the number of trans or LGBTQ+ suspects is in “the single digit numbers.”

“Trans Americans are more likely to be the victim of a violent crime than a perpetrator of one… violence committed by trans Americans is a lie, a lie that only begets more violence.”

Shelby Chestnut of the Transgender Law Center warned that the federal government’s posture would escalate attacks on the community.

“Bullying communities and manufacturing chaos will never erase the truth that we are far more connected than divided,” Chestnut said. “In the coming days and weeks, you will see increased targeting of our organizations and our communities and mis and disinformation being weaponized at the highest level of government.”

Fran Hutchins of the Equality Federation described the move as a direct assault on trans people, echoing Chestnut’s points — but made it clear that this will not stop organizations supporting transgender people from continuing their work.

“This is a campaign that weaponizes fear and misinformation to isolate and harm our communities,” she said. “Let’s call it what it is. It’s political violence… We will not be erased.”

Sarah Kate Ellis, president of GLAAD, the LGBTQ media watchdog organization, urged the press not to fall into false equivalencies, reminding reporters that transgender people face the highest risk of violence, contrary to the narratives pushed by some MAGA Republicans.

“Trans people exist. They always existed, and they will continue to exist,” she said. “The truth is the real trans terrorism… is the terror experienced by trans people in this country.”

Ellis also emphasized that this is an issue of civil and human rights, not something abstract — with real consequences.

“Do not treat civil rights as a both sides issue.”

Brian Bond of PFLAG (Parents, Families, and Friends of Lesbians and Gays) framed the FBI’s proposal as a betrayal of American values, calling it “un-American” and “despicable,” while warning that even if it doesn’t immediately affect everyone, it represents a slippery slope.

“Every child in their family, every family member, every neighbor, transgender or not, is affected.”

He added: “PFLAG parents… will not back down.”

Beth Littrell of the Southern Poverty Law Center underscored the constitutional implications of these potential actions, their consequences for other marginalized groups, and the role of the media in calling out the Trump administration’s tactics.

“The real threat is when the government targets a group of people and those who support them for unequal treatment based only on who they are or what they believe,” Littrell said. “It should go without saying, but I say it anyway, transgender children do not threaten anyone’s ability to safely live and thrive in our nation or anywhere else.”

“What is being reported is unconstitutional. What is happening is dangerous,” she added. “We have seen this playbook before… We fought alongside the communities then, we will continue to do so now.”

Advocates closed the call with a unified demand: that political leaders, the media, and the public reject any attempt to label transgender people as extremists and instead hold accountable those responsible for spreading violence and misinformation.

Texas A&M President resigns over controversy in LGBTQ teachings

Read more at Yahoo.

The President of Texas A&M University, Mark Welsh, resigned last week amid controversy over a viral video between a professor and a student debating gender ideology.

Welsh stepped down officially on Friday, September 19, according to a press release where the Chancellor Glenn Hegar thanked Welsh for his service to the university and the nation.

“President Welsh is a man of honor who has led Texas A&M with selfless dedication,” said Hegar. “We are grateful for his service and contributions. At the same time, we agree that now is the right moment to make a change and to position Texas A&M for continued excellence in the years ahead.”

The former president resigned while the university faces heated backlash after a video was posted of a student calling out a professor for teaching gender ideology in the classroom.

Professor Melissa McCoul was sharing an image of a “gender unicorn” that demonstrates concepts of gender expressions, identity and sexuality while reading “Jude Saves the World,” a novel about a 12-year-old who comes out as nonbinary, according to The Texas Tribune.

The student said it was illegal according to an executive order signed by President Trump and went against her religious beliefs.

“[M]y Administration will defend women’s rights and protect freedom of conscience by using clear and accurate language and policies that recognize women are biologically female, and men are biologically male,” Trump wrote in the executive order.

State Rep. Brian Harrison, R-Texas, reposted the video on X.

“The governor and lieutenant governor and speaker have been telling everybody for two years now that we passed bans on DEI and transgender indoctrination in public universities,” Harrison wrote on his X account. “The only little problem with that? It’s a complete lie. … The state of Texas — despite what the governor said in his tweet yesterday, that this is a violation of law — there is no state law that we passed.”

Professor McCoul was later fired, according to press reports.

Former A&M President Welsh allegedly defended the inclusion of LGBTQ content in the classroom.

“Those people don’t get to pick who their clients are, what citizens they serve and they want to understand the issues affecting the people that they’re going to treat,” Welsh said in an audio recording posted by Harrison on X. “So there is a professional reason to teach some of these courses.”

In the past few years, Texas has been one of many states fighting LGBTQ and diversity, equity and inclusion efforts in schools.

Slovakia Enshrines Only Two Sexes in Constitution, Restricting Adoption and Surrogacy for LGBTQ People

Read more at Gayety.

Slovakia’s parliament, has approved a sweeping constitutional amendment that legally recognizes only two sexes—male and female, and imposes new limits on adoption and surrogacy, sparking alarm from human rights groups and LGBTQ+ advocates.

The amendment, passed in a narrow 90‑vote majority in the 150‑seat National Council, also restricts adoption to married heterosexual couples and bans surrogate pregnancies. It was framed by Prime Minister Robert Fico’s government as a defense of “sovereignty in cultural and ethical matters” and traditional values. Fico heralded the vote as “a great dam against progressivism.”

The constitutional change marks one of the most significant curbs yet on LGBTQ+ and reproductive rights in the country, critics say, aligning Slovakia more closely with Hungary’s conservative trajectory, and raising concerns about violations of international commitments and human rights.

What the Law Does

  • Defining Sex and Gender: The amendment states explicitly that only two sexes—male and female—are recognized under Slovak law. Legal definitions of gender identity beyond that framework are excluded.
  • Adoption Restrictions: Only married heterosexual couples will now be able to adopt children. Same‑sex couples are excluded from adoption rights under the new wording.
  • Ban on Surrogacy: The law prohibits surrogate pregnancies.
  • Assertion of “National Identity”: The amendment declares that Slovakia retains sovereignty over issues of national identity, culture, and state ethics, even potentially above European Union law in certain areas.

Passage and Political Dynamics

The vote was precariously close. Fico’s coalition controls fewer than the 90 votes required for constitutional amendments, but 12 opposition lawmakers from conservative parties defected last minute, providing the margin required for passage.

Some opposition figures expressed outrage, describing defectors as traitors, alleging the vote was a political maneuver to distract from declining public approval and other unpopular measures.

President Peter Pellegrini said he would sign the amendment into law, framing the constitutional majority as a signal of political consensus in deeply polarized times.

Responses and Broader Implications

Human rights organizations were quick to condemn the change. Critics warn it will lengthen the legal limbo for trans, non‑binary, and intersex people, reduce access to gender recognition, and further institutionalize discrimination.

There are also worries it will lead to clashes with EU law, which guarantees certain protections for minority and LGBTQ+ populations. Legal scholars suggest the amendments may violate international treaties and could become the subject of legal challenges.

For Slovak LGBTQ+ individuals, the change is deeply personal. It removes recognition for anyone who doesn’t fit neatly into “male” or “female,” and restricts family formation for non‑heterosexual parents.

NYC lawmakers accuse Amtrak of ‘Stonewall era’ tactics in Penn Station cruising crackdown

Read more at the Gothamist.

New York lawmakers are demanding that Amtrak police stop arresting LGBTQ people on charges of public lewdness in a men’s bathroom at Penn Station, likening the crackdown to “the Stonewall era.”

The letter from Rep. Jerrold Nadler, two state senators and a state assemblymember follows reports by Gothamist and The City that 200 people have been arrested since June for alleged public lewdness or indecent exposure in the bathroom. At least 20 of those people were immigrants transferred to ICE custody after the arrest, law enforcement officials said.

“We demand that Amtrak Police immediately cease identifying and targeting members of the LGBTQ community for search, seizure and arrest on the basis of their perceived sexual orientation or gender identity,” the lawmakers wrote to Amtrak President Roger Harris. “While Amtrak is entitled to ensure that its facilities are not used for illicit purposes, we do not believe Amtrak should be doing so with a hostile arrest campaign reminiscent of anti-LGBTQ policing from the Stonewall era.”

State Sens. Brad Hoylman-Sigal and Liz Krueger, and Assemblymember Tony Simone, who all represent parts of Manhattan, also signed the letter.

The crackdown involved undercover officers posted in the bathrooms at urinals or in stalls, looking for men meeting up for anonymous sex. A cruising app called “Sniffies” featured a group dedicated to the bathroom. In recent weeks it featured numerous men warning others to avoid the bathroom because of the police presence.

The lawmakers alleged police were using “questionable and potentially discriminatory tactics.”

The lawmakers requested a meeting with Amtrak police to discuss the issue. The surge in enforcement comes as President Donald Trump’s administration has taken over the redevelopment of Penn Station from the MTA.

“As you may know, there is a long and painful tradition of police forces using loitering, identification, prostitution, lewdness and similar laws to target LGBTQ people for harassment, arrest and incarceration,” the letter read.

Amtrak Deputy Police Chief Martin Conway previously said the arrests came in response to complaints from customers. Amtrak spokesperson Jason Abrams said incidents at Penn Station have declined since the enforcement surge.

“Amtrak remains committed to maintaining a safe and welcoming environment for all travelers and will continue to monitor conditions closely, making adjustments as needed to uphold the highest standards of security,” Abrams said.

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑