An ongoing boycott against Target appears to be taking effect as foot traffic declines for the tenth consecutive week.
Foot traffic in Target stores declined 9 percent year-over-year in February and 6.5 percent year-over-year in March, according to data from analytics firm Placer.ai reported by CNN. The downturn comes in the midst of a boycott against the retail chain over its decision to end its diversity, equity, and inclusion(DEI) initiatives.
The boycott against Target began at the start of Lent, a Christian observance that occurs in the 40 days before Easter during which participants typically give up something they enjoy. The action was spearheaded by Jamal Bryant, lead pastor at New Birth Missionary Baptist Church near Atlanta, Georgia, who encouraged parishioners to buy from Black-owned businesses instead.
Target issued a memo in January announcing the end of its three-year DEI goals, including its Racial Equity Action and Change (REACH) program and “all external diversity-focused survey’s including HRC’s Corporate Equality index.” The Human Rights Campaign effort, which provides benchmarks on corporate policies relevant to LGBTQ+ employees, previously gave Target a score of 100 percent, dubbing the company a “Leader in LGBTQ+ Workplace Inclusion.”
The end of DEI programs and LGBTQ+ inclusivity initiatives marked a significant shift for the Minnesota-based company, which once withstood protests from hate groups over its inclusive bathroom policies and Pride displays. However, the change was not sudden, as Target pulled some of its Pride Month merchandisein 2023 amid threats and violent protests in stores.
Though it was originally pitched as a 40-day “fast,” Bryant told attendees at his Easter Sunday sermon that the boycott will continue. Bryant said that the executives he had met with did not agree to meet four key demands: invest $2 billion in Black-owned businesses by July 31, restore DEI efforts internally, deposit $250 million into Black-owned banks, and establish new partnerships with HBCUs. The pastor claimed that the company had only agreed to the first, and would not reinstate its DEI initiatives.
“I told them what I’m getting ready to tell you — we ain’t going back in there,” Bryant said, via local station 11Alive. “If Target doesn’t show up, the community still will.”
Attorney General Pam Bondi issued a memo this week seeking to further curtail access to transgender health care for minors. In the memo, Bondi said the Justice Department will use a variety of existing U.S. laws to investigate providers of such care, as well as drug manufacturersand distributors.
She directed U.S. attorneys to use laws against female genital mutilation to investigate doctors who “mutilate” children “under the guise of care” and to prosecute these“offenses to the fullest extent possible.”
“I am putting medical practitioners, hospitals, and clinics on notice: In the United States, it is a felony to perform, attempt to perform, or conspire to perform female genital mutilation (‘FGM’) on any person under the age of 18,” Bondi wrote. “That crime carries a maximum prison sentence of 10 years per count.”
Bondi also directed the Consumer Protection Branch of the DOJ’s Civil Division to investigate potential violations of the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Actby drug manufacturers and distributors who engage “in misbranding by making false claims about the on- or off-label use of puberty blockers, sex hormones, or any other drug used to facilitate” a minor’s gender transition.
And she directed the Civil Division’s Fraud Section to investigate potential violations of the False Claims Act by physicians who submit “false claims … to federal health care programs for any non-covered services related to radical gender experimentation.” (She included as an example of this a physician prescribing puberty blockers to a minor for gender-transition care but reporting it to Medicaid as being for early-onset puberty.)
Robin Maril, an assistant professor of constitutional law at Oregon’s Willamette University, said Bondi’s memo doesn’t change any existing laws. Doctors, she said, will not be breaking the law by continuing to treat trans minors if they live in a state where such care is still legal. She also noted that Medicaid fraud and defrauding the government are already crimes.
“The bulk of this is just showing how they’re going to use resources and investigate,” Maril said. “That’s not a law change. It’s meant to have a chilling effect on physicians providing access to necessary care, fearing that it will be characterized as chemical and surgical mutilation of children.”
She added that the memo’s call on whistleblowers to report “knowledge of any such violations” could further make doctors afraid of being reported.
Chase Strangio, the first transgender attorney to argue before the Supreme Court, with supporters on Dec. 4, when the court heard the case of U.S. vs. Skrmetti. Marvin Joseph / The Washington Post via Getty Images
It’s unclear what type of procedure would be considered female genital mutilation “under the guise of care” according to Bondi’s interpretation of U.S. law. The FBI defines it as “partial or total removal of the external female genitalia or other injuries to the female genital organs for non-medical reasons.”
Transition-related care for minors can encompass a range of treatments, including talk therapy for younger children, puberty-blocking medications for adolescents and hormone therapy for older teens. Bondi’s memo specifically mentions gender-affirming surgeries, which are not recommended for minors. In rare cases, older teens can receive a double mastectomy, or removal of the breasts.
It’s also unclear ifBondi’s directives would conflict with federal and state anti-discrimination laws. A provision in the Affordable Care Act, for example, prohibits physicians who are providing federally funded services from discriminating based on sex. The Biden administration issued a notice interpreting that provision to include protection based on gender identity, but the Trump administration rescinded that notice in February. Some advocates argue the provision’s protections and some state nondiscrimination laws still apply.
Despite this, Bondi’s memo refers to this type of care as “radical gender experimentation,” and it cites research conducted by an advocacy group that opposes gender-affirming care for minors. That group found that, from 2019 to 2023, 14,000 children received treatment for gender dysphoria — the medical term for the distress caused by the misalignment between one’s gender identity and sex assigned at birth — and 5,700 had surgery.
However, trans advocates have noted that the rate of breast surgeries among adolescents who are cisgender, meaning not transgender, is much higher. For example, in 2011, more than 14,000 breast reduction procedures were performed in the United States on adolescent boys to correct gynecomastia, a benign condition that causes enlarged breast tissue, according to the American Society of Plastic Surgeons.
Bondi’s memo is the administration’s latest attempt at restricting trans health care. Just over a week after his inauguration, President Donald Trump signed a sweeping executive order aimed at curtailing transition-related care for minors by prohibiting federal funding for such care and threatening to withhold grants from hospitals and medical universities that provide the care, among other restrictions. At least two judges have temporarily blocked that order from taking effect.
Over the last few years, 27 states have enacted measures restricting access to transition-related care for minors. The Supreme Court is expected to issue a decision soon in a lawsuit against such a restriction in Tennessee, which could affect minors’ access to care nationwide and potentially care for trans adults under federally funded health programs.
The Supreme Court seemed likely to uphold a key preventive-care provision of the Affordable Care Act in a case heard Monday.
Conservative justices Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett, along with the court’s three liberals, appeared skeptical of arguments that Obamacare’s process for deciding which services must be fully covered by private insurance is unconstitutional.
The case came before the Supreme Court after the appeals court struck down some preventive care coverage requirements. It sided with Christian employers and Texas residents who argued they can’t be forced to provide full insurance coverage for things like medication to prevent HIV and some cancer screenings.
The appeals court’s ruling took explicit aim at the H.I.V. drug regimen known as pre-exposure prophylaxis, or PrEP, saying the law’s requirement that it be fully covered violated the religious freedom of a plaintiff in the case, Braidwood Management.
The company’s owner, Dr. Steven F. Hotze, a well-known Republican donor and doctor from Houston, has previously challenged the Affordable Care Act on other grounds.
The case stems from a lawsuit filed in 2020 by Dr. Hotze and other Christian business owners and employees in Texas; they maintained that the preventive care mandate violates their constitutional right to religious freedom by requiring companies and policyholders to pay for coverage that goes against their faith.
In 2022, after living as a boy and going by a new name for several years, a 15-year-old from Madison, Wisconsin, wanted to make it official. Like most teenagers, he dreamed of getting his driver’s license, and his family wanted his government identification to reflect who he really was.
But Wisconsin law has a caveat: He would have to publish his old, feminine name and new name in the local newspaper for three weeks — essentially announcing to the world that he is transgender.
In many instances, if he had committed a crime, the law would afford him privacy as a minor. But not as a transgender teenager changing his name.
His parents worry the public notice now poses a risk as President Donald Trump has attacked transgender rights, asserted that U.S. policy recognizes only two sexes and described efforts to support transgender people as “child abuse.” The publication requirements endanger the community, lawyers working with trans people say, by creating a de facto dataset of likely transgender people that vigilantes and even the government could use for firing, harassment or violence.
Transgender people are over four times more likely to be victims of violence, research shows. Most transgender people and their families agreed to be interviewed for this story only if they weren’t named, citing safety concerns.
“Publication requirements really leave folks open and vulnerable to discrimination and to harassment more than they already are,” said Arli Christian, senior policy counsel at the American Civil Liberties Union. “It can put people at risk of violence and blatant discrimination simply because of who they are.”
Wisconsin’s legal process stems from a 167-year-old law, one of many statutes across the country that Christian said were intended to keep people from escaping debts or criminal records. Changing one’s name through marriage is a separate process that does not require publication in a paper.
Although the right to change one’s legal name exists in every state, the effort and risk required to exercise it vary. Less than half of states require people to publicize their name changes in some or all cases, according to the Movement Advancement Project, a think tank that tracks voting and LGBTQ+ rights.
Wisconsin law grants confidentiality only if a person can prove it’s more likely than not that publication “could endanger” them. But the statute does not define what that means. For years, some judges interpreted that to include psychological abuse or bullying, or they accepted statistics documenting discrimination and violence against transgender people nationwide.
In 2023, however, a state appeals court set a stricter standard after a trans teenager was denied a confidential name change in Brown County, home to Green Bay. The teen said he had endured years of bullying, in which peers called him slurs and beat him up. Court records show the Brown County judge asserted that publishing the teen’s name wouldn’t expose him to further harm because his harassers already knew he was transgender.
The teen argued that a public process would create a record available to people he met in the future. While the appeals court conceded a “reasonable judge” could agree, it found the Brown County judge had not improperly exercised her discretion in denying the request. Crucially, the appeals court determined that “endanger” meant only physical harm. The case wasn’t appealed to the Wisconsin Supreme Court.
Both of these trans girls living in Wisconsin requested the confidential name-change process after the 2024 presidential election. First image: A 14-year-old likes cuddling her cat, playing video games and practicing piano. Second image: A 12-year-old shares her artwork. Illustrations by Shoshana Gordon/ProPublica. Source images obtained by ProPublica.
The combination of Wisconsin’s public requirement, the restrictive ruling and the Trump administration’s anti-trans policies has dissuaded at least one person from going through with a name change.
J.J Koechell, a 20-year-old LGBTQ+ advocate from suburban Milwaukee, tried to change his name in November but decided against it after a judge denied his request for confidentiality, ordering him to publish his change in the local paper and create a public court record if he wanted to proceed.
“That’s already dangerous,” Koechell said of a public process, “given our political atmosphere, with an administration that’s trying to erase trans people from existence completely, or saying that they don’t exist, or that there’s something wrong with them.”
At the end of March, Wisconsin Democrats announced plans to introduce a bill that would eliminate the publication requirement for transgender people, so long as they can prove they’re not avoiding debt or a criminal record. Republicans, who control the Legislature, will decide whether it will receive a hearing or vote.
There has been a push in some states to make it easier and safer for transgender people to update their legal documents. Michigan and Illinois laws removing publication requirements took effect earlier this year. And a California lawmaker introduced a bill that would retroactively seal all transition-related court records.
Assembly Speaker Robin Vos, R-Rochester, did not respond to emails and a phone call to his office seeking comment. Wisconsin Watch and ProPublica sought comment from four other Republican leaders in the Assembly and Senate. Of the two whose offices responded, a staffer for Assembly Majority Leader Tyler August, R-Walworth, said, “It doesn’t look like something we’d consider a priority,” and a staffer for Senate Assistant Majority Leader Dan Feyen, R-Fond du Lac, said he was not available for comment.
Asked about the safety concerns people raised, a White House spokesperson said, “President Trump has vowed to defend women from gender ideology extremism and restore biological truth to the Federal government.”
No Exceptions for Minors
Wisconsin’s law requires a transgender person to publish the details of their identity to change their name whether they are an adult or a child. The notice requirement makes no distinction based on age.
This is less privacy than the legal system typically affords young people, confirmed Cary Bloodworth, who directs a family law clinic at the University of Wisconsin Law School. Bloodworth said both child welfare and juvenile courts tend to keep records confidential for a number of reasons, including that what happens in a person’s youth will follow them for a lifetime.
“I certainly think having a higher level of privacy for kids is a good thing,” Bloodworth said, adding that she thinks the publication requirement is unnecessary for people of any age.
A mom living near the Wisconsin-Illinois border whose 11-year-old daughter recently went through the name-change process said these proceedings should automatically be private for children.
“The fact that we still have to fight to get something as simple as a confidential name change for a minor who is obviously not running away from criminal or debt charges is just so frustrating and overwhelming,” she said.
The judge deciding their case seemed reluctant to grant confidentiality at first, questioning whether her daughter was being threatened physically, she said. The judge granted the confidential change. But the family remains shaken.
“We live just in constant terror of the wrong person finding out that we have an 11-year-old trans child,” she said. “All it takes is one wrong person getting that information, and what we could end up going through, becoming a target, is horrifying.”
Right before the pandemic, a teenager told her parents she was transgender. She spent much of that first year of her transition at home, attending virtual school like the rest of her peers in the Madison school district. She came out to only a few friends and wanted to keep her gender identity private, so she kept her camera off and skipped her high school graduation.
When she decided to legally change her name, the prospect of publicizing her transition terrified her, according to her mom.
“I explained to her that it’s in tiny, tiny print, and it’s in some page of the paper that no one is going to read,” her mom said. “But it felt to her like she was just standing out there in public with a ‘TRANS’ sign on her.”
While fewer people read physical newspapers these days, much of their content gets published online and is easily searchable. The court case, too, becomes a public record that is stored online and sometimes aggregated by other websites that show up at the top of search results.
The parents of the then-15-year-old boy who changed his name before getting his driver’s license discovered that happened to their son. When anyone — say, a prospective employer — searches the young man’s name, one of the first results shows his old name and outs him as trans.
“This is what somebody would use as their first judgment of him,” his mom said. “We certainly don’t want that to be something that people would use to rule him out for a job, or whatever it is he might be doing.”
Like many other states, Wisconsin does not have laws that ban discrimination against transgender people in credit and lending practices or in public spaces like stores, restaurants, parks, doctor’s offices and hotels. However, Gov. Tony Evers, a Democrat, issued an executive order in 2019 banning transgender discrimination in state employment, contracting and public services.
After Trump took office again and began issuing executive orders attacking trans rights, the boy’s family started to investigate how they could retroactively seal the court records related to the name change. It wouldn’t change what was in the newspaper, but it could help them remove the online records. The court records also contain sensitive information like their home address that someone could use to harass them.
A friend who was a retired attorney helped their son craft an affidavit describing his experiences. His mom read from it during an interview. “‘Because of recent political events, I fear violence —’” she said before breaking off. “Oh God, I hate even reading this. ‘I fear violence, harassment, retribution because of my status as a transgender person.’”
Her son, who is now 18, shared a statement over email.
“At this moment in time I’m probably more scared about being a trans person than I ever have been before, with the public record if you have my first and last name you can easily find my deadname and therefore find out I’m trans,” he said. “I would love to say that I feel safe and valued in our society but unfortunately I can’t, at times I feel that my personhood is being stripped away under this government.”
Anne Daugherty-Leiter, who has guided transgender clients and their families through the name-change process as board president of Trans Law Help Wisconsin, said where a person lives in Wisconsin, and therefore what court they must petition, affects their likelihood of getting a confidential change.
Confidentiality is important, she said, because of how the state handles changes to birth certificates. Wisconsin birth certificates that are issued through a confidential name change show only the new name. But if a person has to announce their name change publicly, birth certificates are amended to list both the person’s old and new names. Any time the person has to use that document, at the DMV or while getting a loan, it outs them, she said.
“This Is Not Who I Am”
Koechell, a trans man and LGBTQ+ activist, was unwilling to go through with the name-change process after being denied confidentiality by a judge late last year.
Koechell lives in Waukesha County, a Republican stronghold where multiple schools have enacted policies critics have called anti-LGBTQ+.
In a letter to the judge, Koechell wrote that people had sent him multiple threats and posted his family members’ addresses online, all for “being an advocate and being transgender openly in my community.”
“I do not want to publish my deadname for people to use against me,” he said in an interview, using a term common among transgender people to refer to their birth names. “I don’t see a reason why people who are not particularly fond of me wouldn’t show up at a hearing like that and try and cause trouble.”
Court records show the judge denied Koechell’s confidentiality request and his request to reconsider. The judge’s order referred to Koechell, a trans man with a masculine voice and beard, as “she” and “her.”
Koechell decided the public process wasn’t worth the risk. But it’s hard, he said, to move through life with his old identification.
“When I go to a new doctor or new appointment or something, then that’s the name on my chart, and then I get called that in a waiting room full of people, and it’s super uncomfortable. I just want to disappear,” Koechell said. “Then eventually, I have to correct the doctors, and I’m like, ‘Hey, just to let you know, I don’t go by that name. This is not who I am.’”
Data from the latest U.S. Transgender Survey found that 22% of people who had to show an ID that did not match their identity experienced some form of negative consequence, including verbal harassment, discrimination or physical violence.
If the U.S. Senate passes the SAVE Act, which would require voters to prove citizenship with a passport or birth certificate, those consequences could include disenfranchisement. Transgender people who can’t change the name on their birth certificate or passport would be ineligible to vote, according to the liberal think tank Center for American Progress.
U.S. Rep. Chip Roy, a Texas Republican and chief sponsor of the bill, has said the legislation directs states to create a process for citizens with a “name discrepancy” to register. “No one will be unable to vote because of a name change,” he said.
Trace Schlax, a trans man in Wisconsin, has tried to change his gender marker and name on official documents. Joe Timmerman/Wisconsin Watch
After Trump won in November, Trace Schlax, a 40-year-old IT project manager, decided to expedite changing his gender marker on his passport, figuring he could update his name later in state court.
“It matters,” Schlax said. He loves to travel but has encountered extra scrutiny from airport security with outdated documents. “I get comments from TSA when I go through to travel domestically, about my hair, about how I look. I get extra pat-downs.”
He sent his application in early December and crossed his fingers. He received it back in February, rejected. By that time, Trump had issued an executive order banning trans people from changing the gender markers on their passports.
Schlax decided to continue updating what records he could, like his birth certificate and driver’s license. He worries about having conflicting documents. Will he get accused of fraud? Will he have trouble flying?
But in the end, he decided it was still important to change his name and update his license to improve his day-to-day experience.
And he decided to go about it publicly. It felt less painful, he said, to accept the risks rather than detail his personal, traumatic experiences to a judge only to have them decide he hadn’t endured sufficient danger.
“Me changing my name and my gender marker affects absolutely no one but me,” said Schlax, who has a court date to change his name in late April. “Why does this have to be so hard? Why do I have to prove myself so hard?”
The Alabama state House of Representatives passed three anti-LGBTQ+ laws on the same day.
Republicans approved the bills Thursday, which included an expansion of the state’s “Don’t Say Gay” law to encompass grades K-12, a ban on drag performances in some public spaces, an LGBTQ+ Pride flag ban in public schools, a ban against school employees using students’ preferred names and pronouns, and a law requiring the Ten Commandments to be displaced in all public education institutions — even colleges. The bills now head to the state Senate.
HB 244 would “prohibit classroom instruction in public school prekindergarten through the twelfth grade related to gender identity or sexual orientation; to prohibit education employees from displaying certain flags and insignia in public preK-12 schools; and to prohibit education employees from referring to a student by pronouns inconsistent with the student’s biological sex.”
The “certain flags” employees are forbidden from displaying are flags “relating to or representing sexual orientation or gender identity in a classroom of a public preK-12 school,” singling out the LGBTQ+ Pride flag.
HB 67 would “prohibit public K-12 schools and public libraries from knowingly presenting or sponsoring drag performances in the presence of a minor without the consent of the minor’s parent or legal guardian.” Drag is defined as “a performance in which a performer exhibits a sex identity that is different from the sex assigned to the performer at birth using clothing, makeup, or other physical markers,” leaving uncertainty as to how it will impact transgender people.
HB 178/SB 166 would require “each local board of education and the governing body of each public institution of higher education to display the Ten Commandments and a context statement in a common area of each school under its jurisdiction.” Schools are not required to use their funding for this, and can instead accept donations.
The American Civil Liberties Union of Alabama said in a statement in response to the bill’s introduction that mandating the Ten Commandments in public schools is “unconstitutional – plain and simple.”
“The First Amendment guarantees that students and their families — not politicians or the government — get to decide which religious beliefs, if any, they adopt and what role those beliefs will play in their lives,” the group wrote. “Displaying the Ten Commandments in public-school classrooms blatantly violates this promise. Students can’t focus on learning if they don’t feel safe and welcome in their schools.”
The organization denounced a previous version of the drag ban in a separate statement, calling it “an attempt to censor LGBTQ experiences from the public.”
“The attempt of legislators to censor performers based on their personal viewpoints is contradictory to our first amendment rights,” it wrote. “The ACLU of Alabama wants to protect our first amendment right to express ourselves. Drag performances are part of that expression and should not be censored by the state based on subjective viewpoints on whether or not they are appropriate.”
The Trump Administration has proposed eliminating funding for a crucial suicide hotline dedicated to LGBTQ+ youth.
A leaked budget draft, first obtained by The Washington Post, shows the federal government’s plans to eliminate all funding for the 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline’s LGBTQ+ Youth Specialized Services – a federal program that provides emergency crisis support to LGBTQ+ youth considering suicide – effective October 1, 2025.
“Suicide prevention is about risk, not identity. Ending the 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline’s LGBTQ+ youth specialized services will not just strip away access from millions of LGBTQ+ kids and teens – it will put their lives at risk,” Jaymes Black, CEO of The Trevor Project, said in a statement. “These programs were implemented to address a proven, unprecedented, and ongoing mental health crisis among our nation’s young people with strong bipartisan support in Congress and signed into law by President Trump himself.”
Black emphasized that help is still available, and will continue to be available regardless of if the measure is enacted, adding, “I want to be clear to all LGBTQ+ young people: This news, while upsetting, is not final. And regardless of federal funding shifts, The Trevor Project remains available 24/7 for anyone who needs us, just as we always have.”
The Trevor Project estimates that more than 1.8 million LGBTQ+ youth in the U.S. seriously consider suicide each year, and at least one attempts suicide every 45 seconds. The LGBTQ+ Youth Specialized Services, funded through the Department of Health and Human Services, has provided more than 1.2 million people with queer-inclusive crisis services, and the 988 Lifeline has served more than 14 million, government data shows.
The Trevor Project’s crisis services saw a 33 percent increase in calls and messages on the day of Trump’s inauguration compared to the weeks prior. Volume went up 46 percent the next day in comparison to typical daily rates. This followed a record-breaking 700 percent increase observed across the Trevor Project’s crisis lines on November 6, the day after the presidential election.
“To end suicide in this country, we need more resources – not fewer,” Black continued. “We urge the Administration to maintain its long-standing commitment to ending suicide among high-risk populations, especially our nation’s young people. We urge Congress to defend its establishment of this data-based, bipartisan program to allow its life-saving services to continue for generations to come. We do not have to agree on every policy issue to agree that every young life is worth saving.”
If you or someone you know needs mental health resources and support, please call, text, or chat with the 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline or visit988lifeline.org for 24/7 access to free and confidential services. Trans Lifeline, designed for transgender or gender-nonconforming people, can be reached at (877) 565-8860. The lifeline also provides resources to help with other crises, such as domestic violence situations. The Trevor Project Lifeline, for LGBTQ+ youth (ages 24 and younger), can be reached at (866) 488-7386. Users can also access chat services at TheTrevorProject.org/Help or text START to 678678.
Fearful Philadelphians began contacting Angela Giampolo immediately following Donald Trump’s 2016 election victory. Though many queer locals knew about her LGBTQ+-focused law firm (which she established in 2008), she began wondering about people in rural areas and red states: Who would they contact to help protect their legal rights?
That’s when she dreamt up Caravan of Hope, a way to offer mobile legal services to LGBTQ+ people in underserved areas. Using mostly her own money, she purchased an RV trailer, renovated it into a mobile office and planned a 30-day trip to 14 cities across the nation — an over 5,000 mile drive — where she offereda day’s worth of queer-related legal services like gender marker and name changes, basic estate planning, uncontested divorces, and general legal guidance.
The trip, which first occurred in June 2023 and is scheduled to recur next October, will visit cities like Lincoln, Nebraska; Albuquerque, New Mexico; and Laramie, Wyoming (the death place of Matthew Shepard, whose lethal 1998 gaybashing first inspired her to pursue law).
Queer people who live in rural areas around these larger cities are sometimes closeted for their own safety, don’t have access to LGBTQ+-centered legal services, or have prejudiced family members who obstruct their legal rights.
“Our approach is discreet yet accessible,” Caravan of Hope’s website reads. “The RV, strategically located 30-45 minutes from the towns we serve, ensures confidentiality and safety for all clients.”
Her romantic partner helps secure food and gear before the trip, a dedicated driver navigates the path across nearly 20 states, and a social media manager helps promote upcoming stops and the caravan’s work as it stops by each city.
Giampolo is only licensed to practice law in Pennsylvania, and her RV isn’t licensed to do business anywhere it parks, she tells LGBTQ Nation. So, to prepare for her trip, she had to find lawyers in each state willing to lend their license to the caravan’s work and LGBTQ+-friendly bars, restaurants, and community centers who would let her conduct business during her visits.
She’s happy to report that the lawyers and businesses who aided her in 2023 have offered to help again this year. Because not every person in need can make it to the caravan’s one-day stops, this year, she and a small group of volunteer lawyers will also offer two weeks of virtual legal services online as part of her autumn tour.
“Recognizing the complexity of legal issues, we don’t just stop at the initial consultation,” the caravan’s website continues. “We commit to ongoing support through online follow-ups, phone calls, and emails, aiming to conclude each case satisfactorily.”
Additionally, the caravan brings a documentarian to help record its work and the first-person testimonies of others in need. Sometimes, people will come to the caravan seeking food, clothing, or shelter—non-legal needs that the caravan can’t provide—or just to share stories of hardship that can’t be litigated. The documentarian captures these stories, too. Giampolo says it can make an emotionally powerful difference.
“Typically, lawyers, if there’s no legal help that can be provided, they either don’t reply, they don’t take the time to listen,” Giampolo tells LGBTQ Nation. “So feeling this for years on, to then having a lawyer sit and listen to someone in particular… feeling seen… feeling normalized and legitimized… holding their hand, letting them cry, hugging them [it helps].”
While Caravan of Hope has received hostile comments online and once had the waste lines on its vehicle cut during one of its overnight stays in an RV park, Giampolo says that most people have been supportive. Even curious neighbors in the RV parks where the caravan stays overnight will sometimes approach with questions and defensiveness, she says, but will then end up sitting and talking.
“I know those people will remember the things that we talked about forever,” Giampolo says.
Even more importantly, the caravan creates a sense of community that lasts long after the RV leaves town. The lawyers, community organizers, and business owners who collaborate to host the caravan all stay in touch afterward. Some have even formed relationships to throw recurring queer events or to continue offering community support of different kinds.
“I just really want as much as possible for folks right now, but the footprint of who we can help is so small,” Giampolo admits. That’s why she’s working with the American Bar Association to help provide Pride Month trainings on LGBTQ+ legal issues, so that more lawyers can begin competently providing the kinds of services she and the caravan provide. She also hopes to establish a nationwide law firm geared predominantly towards the LGBTQ+ community.
In the meantime, whenever an LGBTQ+ person or ally contacts her, asking for help, and they’re unable to meet with the caravan and don’t know who to turn to, “my next goal is to refer them to someone that I know loves and trust and then go from there,” she says.
The Trump administration has cleared the way for people to report doctors who provide gender-affirming care to minors — and now says they can do so without violating federal medical privacy laws.
In new guidance issued Monday, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services announced that health care workers, clinic staff, and even third parties may file complaints against providers offering gender-affirming care and, in many cases, even disclose protected patient information under HIPAA’s whistleblower provisions. Under HIPAA, the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, medical professionals must keep a patient’s health information confidential. The guidance, issued under President Donald Trump’s January 28 executive order titled “Protecting Children from Chemical and Surgical Mutilation,” establishes a new federal portal to collect these reports.
Civil rights and LGBTQ+ health advocates say the move weaponizes patient privacy law against the very people it was designed to protect — and targets providers in a sweeping campaign to scare them out of delivering medically necessary care.
“At a time when trans health is already becoming more and more difficult for patients to access, this guidance is a page out of the anti-abortion activism playbook,” said Adrian Shanker, a national LGBTQ+ health policy expert and senior HHS official under the Biden administration. “That’s the clear goal: to instill fear among providers of best-practice transgender medicine. That’s unfortunate — but it’s also dangerous for the needs of transgender patients who rely on qualified providers with specializations and training to provide that care.”
The new policy doesn’t stand alone. It follows a sweeping federal letter issued just days earlier by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services advising state Medicaid agencies that they may restrict or eliminate coverage of gender-affirming care for minors. The CMS letter explicitly referenced federal sterilization regulations — originally created to protect against coerced sterilization—as justification for blocking puberty blockers and hormone therapy. Advocates called it a dangerous distortion of the law.
The online complaint form from HHS invites users to name doctors, identify hospitals or clinics, and describe the alleged “mutilation of children” — a term the administration uses to refer to evidence-based gender-affirming care. The department encourages people to cite the executive order and offers guidance on reporting providers to multiple federal agencies.
Shanker said the real consequence isn’t theoretical — it’s already happening. “It’s two sides of the same coin because it’s diminished access to care — period,” he told The Advocate. “If providers become fearful of providing the care, fewer providers will offer it.”
For those on the front lines, that fear is palpable. A pediatric gender-affirming care provider at a major children’s hospital in the Midwest told The Advocate that they’re seeing the trust that underpins medicine unravel in real time.
“It feels very chilling,” the provider said, speaking on the condition of anonymity due to security concerns. “We’ve been under the microscope for a long time, but now it feels like they’ve got a free pass to do whatever they want. It’s terrifying for our patients, and it’s terrifying for us as providers.”
The provider said colleagues were asked where their “line in the sand” was at a recent staff meeting—what it would take to stop practicing.
“All of the prescribing providers said, ‘Jail, I guess,’” they said. “That’s my line in the sand. And it feels like we’re inching closer to that every day, especially with this new hotline to report things.”
Even inside their own hospital, they no longer feel safe.
“I know there are people who work here who don’t support the gender program. I’ve heard them say things like, ‘This is over the top — why don’t these kids just get therapy?’ And now they could call this hotline and report me. What does that do to my license? To my safety as a provider?”
The guidance, legal experts say, is both sweeping and unlawful.
“This is blatantly unlawful for multiple reasons — because it discriminates against transgender people because it violates statutory and constitutionally protected medical privacy rights, and because it has no legal basis and is therefore arbitrary and capricious,” Shannon Minter, legal director of the National Center for Lesbian Rights, told The Advocate.
He added that the policy deliberately distorts the concept of whistleblower protection. “This is stretching the definition of a whistleblower to absurd lengths and is plainly designed to encourage the harassment of doctors and others providing needed medical care to transgender people.”
The provider said the guidance only deepens patients’ mistrust of the medical system. Many already wait a year or more to be seen.
“Our waitlist has never been shorter than a year,” they said. “By the time patients get to me, they’ve often had multiple suicide attempts. Nobody walks in and gets hormones. And I’ve never had a minor patient undergo genital surgery—ever.”
Still, the damage is done. “I don’t tell people what I do anymore. I used to say I worked in pediatrics and gender health. Now, I just say pediatrics. I’ve scrubbed all my public social media. The network of providers I refer to has gotten smaller — I only trust people I know personally. That’s what it’s come to.”
When asked what they wanted the public to understand about the care they provided, the provider didn’t hesitate.
“These medical treatments are lifesaving. I’ve seen adolescents go from depressed and suicidal to just thriving and living their best selves. If anyone saw what I see in clinic every day, they’d know this is care that works.”
The guidance claims whistleblowers are protected under several federal laws, including the False Claims Act and the Church Amendments, and outlines how HIPAA’s whistleblower provisions can shield those who report providers to oversight agencies or law enforcement.
However, medical experts and legal advocates point to a glaring omission: gender-affirming care is supported by every major medical association, including the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Medical Association, and the Endocrine Society.
“Evidence-based policymaking would rectify this,” Shanker said. “Instead, they’re using political rhetoric around so-called mutilation rather than following the science.”
Minter is confident that if enforced, the policy would be struck down. “This is yet another example of this administration overreaching and seeking to dictate private medical decisions that belong to families and individuals — not the government.”
Planned Parenthood’s Arizona branch will resume providing gender-affirming healthcare to transgender patients. The chapter had previously paused the treatments in response to the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) sending out a memo warning federally funded healthcare institutions against providing gender-affirming care.
The Arizona branch faced public pressure after news publications began reporting on its decision to end trans-related healthcare. Patients receiving gender treatment at the branch told news outlets they had received voicemails late on Friday, April 11, informing them that their upcoming appointments were being cancelled.
One of these patients, a 23-year-old trans woman from Mesa, Arizona, recounted receiving this call to the trans journalism website Erin in the Morning.
“We are hoping that this is a temporary pause for the next week,” a branch representative said in a voicemail to the patient. They told her the office would reach out upon being able to reschedule.
Planned Parenthood Arizona added a banner to its website explaining the situation. In the explanation, the branch said it had been sent a letter from the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) directing them not to provide gender-affirming care services using Medicaid funding. In response, the Arizona branch decided it would indefinitely discontinue gender treatment for trans patients.
The Arizona branch seems to be the only Planned Parenthood branch currently to pause its gender treatment as a result of this threat. The reported cancellations caused the branch to face public backlash, as many trans people, especially those in rural communities, rely on Planned Parenthood to access their healthcare.
NPR interviewed various representatives from Planned Parenthood last August after an arsonist attacked one of their facilities in Knoxville, Tennessee. In this interview, they discussed the impact that closing its facilities would have on trans patients.
Dr Bhavik Kumar, the medical director of primary and trans care at Planned Parenthood Gulf Coast, told NPR that over 35,000 patients nationwide had sought gender-affirming hormone replacement therapy in 2021.
By Tuesday, April 15, the Arizona facility rescinded its decision and updated its website to feature a new banner that reads: “Planned Parenthood Arizona deeply values and is dedicated to the LGBTQIA+ community, which includes our patients, supporters, and staff. We recognize how critical it is for our patients to have certainty to access essential services, including Gender Affirming Care.”
“After a brief pause, we are pleased to announce the continuation of our Gender Affirming Care services,” the message continued. “This pause occurred out of an abundance of caution after threats to the Medicaid services in our state.”
“The onslaught of attacks on sexual and reproductive health care services in Arizona and across the country is alarming and is a clear, continued effort to shut down Planned Parenthood,” the message added. “This will not be the last threat that aims to deny people medically sound, essential health care, needlessly putting them at risk and unnecessarily creating chaos and confusion around the accessibility of services.”
After the president signed his executive order “Protecting Children from Chemical and Surgical Mutilation,” which threatened to deny federal funding to hospitals providing gender-affirming treatment to individuals under 19 years of age, many hospitals located in sanctuary states for trans people began complying in advance by ending their trans-related healthcare offerings.
Since then, a federal judge has issued a nationwide block on the order’s enforcement, meaning that the federal government cannot withhold funding to hospitals providing gender affirming care. There is very little information to verify that the decision has since been appealed as of writing.
However, it is worth noting that the presidential administration is facing criminal contempt charges for defying a court order to cancel a deportation flight. It remains to be seen if administration officials will attempt to defy the court’s ruling against the president’s ban on gender-affirming care.
A ruling Wednesday from the top court in the United Kingdom that says the legal definition of a woman is someone whose birth sex is female is the latest high-profile action globally involving the issue of what legal recognitions transgender people are allowed. The spectrum of protections around the world ranges widely, from none at all in a number of countries to the existence of anti-discrimination protections and legal gender identity changes in some others.
Here’s a look at actions in some countries recently:
United Kingdom
The decision from U.K. Supreme Court revolved around the U.K. Equality Act, which bars discrimination along protected categories including age, race and sex. The court’s ruling said that for the purposes of the act, the definition of a woman is someone born biologically female, which excludes transgender people. The unanimous decision means trans women can be barred from places like women-only changing rooms and homeless shelters and kept from groups like those offering medical or counseling services only to women. But the ruling also said the decision didn’t mean transgender people were without any legal protection, because the Equality Act also recognizes gender reassignment as a protected category.
Supporters of For Women Scotland, the group that brought the suit, celebrated the decision while advocates for transgender rights called it a setback.
Hungary
Rights for transgender people were restricted as part of a wider crackdown on LGBTQ communities in Hungary through an amendment to its constitution passed on April 14. The measure was proposed by the ruling coalition led by populist Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, and easily sailed through Hungary’s parliament.
Under the new amendment, the nation’s constitution says there are two sexes, male and female. A government spokesman called it “a clarification that legal norms are based on biological reality.” It lays a constitutional groundwork for denying transgender people the ability to have their gender identities protected.
Critics of the amendment said it was about humiliating and excluding people, and part of the ruling party’s moves toward authoritarianism. The amendment also banned any public events from LGBTQ communities, which Hungary’s government has strongly campaigned against in recent years.
Activists wave transgender flags in front of the Hungarian Parliament in Budapest during the Trans Pride march on May 11, 2024. Marton Monus / dpa via Getty Images file
United States
President Donald Trump has made a ban on transgender participation in sports a central focus of his administration. On Wednesday, he sued the state of Maine for not following an executive order he signed that banned transgender athletes from participating in girls’ and women’s sports.
In a February meeting with state governors, Trump called out Gov. Janet Mills for not complying with his order, and threatened to pull federal funding, to which Mills replied, “We’ll see you in court.”
The administration’s lawsuit calls for Maine to be ordered to tell its schools that it’s prohibited for males to participate in athletic competition designated for females.
Another of Trump’s executive orders insists on a rigid definition of the sexes, rather than gender, for federal government purposes. The orders are facing court challenges. For its part, Maine sued the administration after the Department of Agriculture said it was pausing some money for the state’s educational programs. A federal judge on Friday ordered the administration to unfreeze funds intended for a Maine child nutrition program.
It’s not just on the federal level; the question of legal protections for transgender people is a political issue in many American states as well. In twenty-six states, transgender girls from are banned from girls school sports. Other issues around the country include access to gender-related health care for minors and bathroom access in public spaces like schools and government buildings.
