Despite a federal judge’s order blocking the Trump administration from transferring some transgender women to men’s prisons, the Bureau of Prisons is continuing the practice, putting incarcerated trans women at serious risk, The Guardianreports.
According to civil rights attorneys, trans women not covered by ongoing litigation have been forcibly moved to men’s prisons in recent weeks. Some have had their gender markers changed in prison records before relocation. Others report being denied gender-affirming health care, subjected to pat-downs by male guards, and forced to surrender personal undergarments now considered contraband.
“I’m just continuing to be punished for existing,” Whitney, a 31-year-old trans woman recently transferred, told The Guardian before her move.
The transfers stem from Executive Order 14168, which Trump signed on his first day back in office. The sweeping directive states that the attorney general “shall ensure that males are not detained in women’s prisons or housed in women’s detention centers” and bars the use of federal funds for gender-affirming care in prisons. The order eliminates federal recognition of transgender and nonbinaryidentities and mandates that government agencies operate strictly based on one’s sex assigned at birth.
In February, Washington, D.C., U.S. District Judge Royce Lamberth issued an injunction blocking the policy for 12 plaintiffs, ruling that their forced transfer likely violated the Constitution’s prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment. However, The Guardian reports that trans women not included in the lawsuit remain vulnerable.
As The Advocate previously reported, Trump’s executive order is part of a broader effort to erase transgender people from federal policy. The order eliminates legal protections across government agencies, affecting passports, healthcare, housing, and workplace rights.
For trans prisoners, the consequences are particularly severe. The Prison Rape Elimination Act requires officials to assess inmates’ risk of sexual violence, but advocates say Trump’s order disregards these protections.
“This is incredibly unnecessary and cruel,” attorney Kara Janssen, who represents trans women in litigation, told The Guardian.
A Texas state bill could charge transgender people with “gender identity fraud,” making it illegal to identify as trans on official documents and potentially leading to jail time.
The bill, which was filed last week by Republican state Rep. Tom Oliverson, would make it a state jail felony if a person “knowingly makes a false or misleading verbal or written statement” by identifying their sex assigned at birth incorrectly to a governmental entity or to their employer. State jail felonies in Texas are punishable by up to two years in jail and a fine of up to $10,000.
Oliverson did not immediately return a request for comment. So far, the bill has no other co-sponsors, making it unlikely to pass, the Houston Chronicle reported. However, the bill is among the first of its kind nationally and is an example of how legislation targeting trans people has become more clear in its intent and more extreme in recent years, particularly in Texas.
Last month, Texas state Rep. Brent Money, a Republican, filed a bill that would make it illegal for a health care provider to treat any patient, including adults, with puberty-suppressing medication, hormone therapy or surgeries if the purpose of the treatment is to affirm the patient’s gender identity.
Money’s bill is a replica of a law enacted in 2023 that prohibits such treatments for minors. The text of the new bill shows the word “child” struck out and replaced with “person” to apply to adults. The bill would also prohibit medical institutions from receiving public funds if they provide any such treatments.
Money did not immediately return a request for comment. After filing the bill, he said on X that the measure is intended to expand the law restricting care for minors.
“I want to make it clear that my heart goes out to those struggling with gender dysphoria,” he said, referring to the medical term for the severe emotional distress caused by the misalignment between one’s gender identity and birth sex. “These individuals deserve compassion, support, and real solutions to address their pain — not irreversible procedures that leave them scarred for life. This legislation isn’t about judgment; it’s about accountability.”
He added that the bill targets doctors and “medical profiteers” who “exploit vulnerable people, pushing costly surgeries and lifetime pharmaceuticals for financial gain rather than offering genuine care.”
Multiple studies have found that access to transition-related care, including surgeries for adults, improves mental health outcomes. Last year, the National Center for Transgender Equality, which is now called Advocates for Trans Equality, released the largest nationwide survey of the trans community, with more than 90,000 respondents, and found that 94% reported that they were at least a little more satisfied with their lives.
Texas has provided a blueprint over the last decade for states that have sought to restrict trans rights, becoming in 2017 one of the first states, alongside North Carolina, to consider a “bathroom bill,” which would’ve barred trans people from using the restrooms that align with their gender identities.
The bill didn’t pass, but the state has enacted other measures targeting trans people. In March 2022, after failing to pass a bill restricting transition-related care for minors, the state’s attorney general issued a legal opinion that resulted in the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services opening child abuse investigations into parents who were suspected of having provided such care to their minor children.
The state went on to pass a transition-related care restriction, and it has also enacted a measure barring trans student athletes from playing on school sports teams that align with their gender identities, among others. Additionally, the state recently announced that an executive order signed by President Donald Trump bars it from allowing trans people to update the gender marker on their Texas birth certificates, state IDs and driver’s licenses.
Amazon has announced it will begin streaming “The Apprentice” — the reality TV show famous for boosting Donald Trump’s profile — on its Prime Video service on Monday.
It’s the first time the show will be available on a streaming service, and the move highlights the close link between Trump’s time as a reality TV personality and his being elected president twice. The show’s executive producer, Mark Burnett, remains one of his closest allies.
Burnett, the British producer behind “The Apprentice,” as well as “Survivor” and “Shark Tank,” was appointed special envoy to the United Kingdom in December. “‘The Apprentice’ is one of the best shows that I ever produced. The charismatic onscreen presence of President Donald J. Trump made it a bona fide hit!” Burnett said in a press release.
Amazon is set to answer explosive claims of severe harassment and discrimination after a judge ruled that an amended lawsuit from a transgenderformer employee could proceed. The case, brought by Ximena Navarrete, a Mexicantransgender woman, alleges that she endured relentless abuse while working as a Prime Now shopper in Whole Foods stores across Washington, D.C., Maryland, and Virginia.
Navarrete’s lawsuit, originally filed in 2022, accuses Amazon of allowing an unchecked workplace culture of transphobia, racism, and sexual harassment. The amended complaint, which the court recently accepted in part, refines the legal claims and expands on the alleged violations, citing Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, the Civil Rights Act of 1866, and the D.C. Human Rights Act.
Navarrete initially represented herself in the legal proceedings, but after securing attorneys from Alan Lescht and Associates, the complaint was significantly restructured. “Ximena filed her original complaint pro se. She had some legal help, but she was largely doing this without representation,” her attorney, Ari Wilkenfeld, told The Advocate in an interview. “Her original complaint had some fairly significant flaws that had legal effect. What we did was ask the court for permission to amend the complaint to assert all the laws that we believe have been violated.”
The updated complaint details a harrowing workplace environment where Navarrete was allegedly subjected to daily death threats, physical and sexual assault, and repeated refusals to acknowledge her gender identity. Supervisors and coworkers allegedly called her by her former name, physically dragged her from stores, and engaged in persistent verbal abuse. The lawsuit claims Amazon managers ignored her repeated pleas for help and ultimately fired her after she reported the discrimination.
Despite Amazon’s objections, U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson ruled that several of Navarrete’s claims could proceed, including allegations of a hostile work environment and retaliatory termination. The ruling also means Amazon must now formally respond to the allegations, marking a significant step forward in the case, Wilkenfeld said.
He also said that the case underscores a broader issue of workplace discrimination against transgender people, particularly in blue-collar and retail environments. “This kind of discrimination is particularly obscene,” Wilkenfeld said. “People feel empowered to discriminate against trans people in ways they wouldn’t dream of doing to a racial minority or any other kind of minority. They feel empowered to do whatever strikes them as appropriate.”
Since leaving Amazon, Navarrete has continued to struggle with workplace discrimination, her attorneys say, including a harrowing attack by a former employer who allegedly threw acid in her face after learning she was transgender.
While the case still has a long road ahead, her legal team sees it as an opportunity to send a message to other transgender people in distress. “We want to litigate these cases,” Wilkenfeld said. “The laws are here to protect you.”
Amazon has not yet publicly responded to the amended complaint. The Advocate contacted an attorney representing Amazon but did not immediately hear back.
A federal judge in Maryland has issued a preliminary injunction against Donald Trump’s executive order threatening loss of federal funding for medical professionals and institutions that provide gender-affirming care to trans people under 19. That means the policy cannot be enforced while the lawsuit against it proceeds.
This and Trump’s executive order denying recognition of transgender identity “threaten to disrupt treatment of patients, stall critical research, and gut numerous programs in medical institutions that rely on federal funding,” U.S. District Judge Brendan A. Hurson wrote in his ruling, released Tuesday. “Accordingly, the Plaintiffs have shown that they are likely to succeed on the merits, that they would suffer irreparable harms absent an injunction, and that the balance of equities and the public interest tip in their favor.”
Hurson had already issued a temporary restraining order blocking the policy, and it was set to expire Wednesday. The preliminary injunction extends the block for as long as it takes to hear the lawsuit.
Two transgender young adults, five trans adolescents and their families, and two organizations — PFLAG National and GLMA: Health Professionals Advancing LGBTQ+ Equality — filed the suit February 4 challenging the health care order and the gender identity order. The Trump administration directed federal agencies to withhold funds from health care providers and institutions that offer gender-affirming care, including puberty blockers and hormone therapies, to anyone under 19 for the purpose of gender transition. The treatments are allowed for nontrans people who have early-onset puberty, disorders of sexual development, or other conditions.
The suit was filed in U.S. District Court in Maryland. It names Trump as a defendant, along with the Department of Health and Human Services and other federal officials and agencies. The plaintiffs are represented by Lambda Legal, the American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU of Maryland, and the law firms of Hogan Lovells and Jenner & Block.
The restrictions placed on funding by the executive orders are likely to be found unconstitutional, Hurson wrote, as the president is trying to withdraw funding that has been approved by Congress, therefore violating the separation of powers between the executive, legislative, and judicial branches of the federal government. The orders also will probably be found in violation of the U.S. Constitution’s guarantees of equal protection and due process of law, he noted.
People whose care would be disrupted by the health care order stood to suffer irreparable harm, he continued, as would institutions. The order has been interpreted to ban all federal funding to institutions that provide gender-affirming care to trans youth and young adults, whether or not that funding is related to this specific care, and therefore much funding for hospitals and other organizations was in jeopardy, according to Hurson. Some have already stopped providing the care.
“The court’s decision stopping implementation of these perverse and discriminatory executive orders targeting gender-affirming medical care removes a pall of confusion that affected medical institutions across the country and that threatened transgender young people, their families, and the medical professionals who care for them,” Omar Gonzalez-Pagan, senior counsel and health care strategist at Lambda Legal, said in a press release. “With this decision, doctors and hospitals across the country can continue to provide evidence-based, essential, and often lifesaving gender-affirming medical care to transgender people under 19 without fear of retribution.”
“Today’s decision provides relief to transgender young people, their families, and their medical providers who have been thrown into chaos by this administration,” added Joshua Block, senior staff attorney for the ACLU’s LGBTQ & HIV Project. “This order from President Trump is a direct effort to threaten the well-being of transgender people while denying them equal protection under the law, enacted by coercing doctors to follow Trump’s own ideology rather than their best medical judgment. As Judge Hurson has said himself, it is hard to fathom a form of discrimination more nefarious than that which pretends the group of people being targeted doesn’t even exist.”
“Again, the court has ruled to ensure hospitals, doctors, and healthcare professionals in our communities can continue the work to keep our families healthy,” Brian K. Bond, chief executive officer of PFLAG National, said in the release. “Transgender people and their supportive parents and families are good and decent people who deserve the freedom to be themselves and to thrive. PFLAG National and our vast network of chapters, members, and supporters will continue to ensure that love leads in this fight for justice for transgender people.”
“Today’s ruling is a crucial step in resisting the extremist agenda of the Trump administration and reaffirming that trans and nonbinary people deserve dignity, respect, and access to the health care they need,” said Alex Sheldon, executive director of GLMA. “This administration has tried to bully providers into abandoning their ethical obligations, but we will not back down. We will continue to fight for health professionals’ freedom to do their jobs based on medical expertise — not political ideology — and for the right of every patient to receive carefree from discrimination and fear.”
The anti-trans health care order has also been blocked in a separate lawsuit in a federal court in Washington State. The suit was filed by the Democraticattorneys general of Washington, Oregon, and Minnesota, along with three doctors who argued that the order violated constitutional protections and overstepped presidential authority. Judge Lauren King issued a temporary restraining order in mid-February and a preliminary injunction last Friday.
owa Gov. Kim Reynolds signed a bill Friday that strikes gender identity from the state’s civil rights law, making Iowa the first state to remove civil rights from a previously protected class.
The bill passed the Republican-majority state Senate, 33-15, along party lines Thursday. Less than an hour later, the House passed its version of the bill, 60-36, with five Republicans joining Democrats to vote against it.
Reynolds, a Republican, said in a statement Friday that the bill “safeguards the rights of women and girls.” She said the civil rights code’s protections against discrimination based on gender identity “blurred the biological lines between the sexes,” and “forced Iowa taxpayers to pay for gender-reassignment surgeries.”
“We all agree that every Iowan, without exception, deserves respect and dignity,” she said. “What this bill does accomplish is to strengthen protections for women and girls, and I believe that it is the right thing to do.”
The Iowa Civil Rights Act broadly prohibits discrimination in many areas of life, including employment, housing, education and credit. In 2007, the state Legislature, which was then controlled by Democrats, passed a bill that extended those protections to LGBTQ people, adding sexual orientation and gender identity to the list of protected classes.
The new law removes gender identity from the code. It also requires that birth certificates reflect a person’s sex assigned at birth and removes a clause that previously allowed a trans person to update the sex marker on their birth certificate if they had a notarized affidavit from a doctor and surgeon attesting that they had medically transitioned.
The law also revises a measure Reynolds signed in 2023 that prohibits the instruction of sexual orientation or gender identity in kindergarten through sixth grade to change “gender identity” to “gender theory,” which it defines as the concept that someone can have “an internal sense of gender that is incongruent with the individual’s sex” assigned at birth. Critics have called the measure a “don’t say gay” law.
Democratic Iowa state Rep. Aime Wichtendahl, the first trans person elected to the state’s General Assembly, said during the House debate Thursday that the bill “revokes protections to our homes and our ability to access credit. In other words, it deprives us of our life, liberty and pursuit of happiness.”
Wichtendahl added, through tears, that transitioning saved her life.
“The sum total of every anti-trans and anti-LGBTQ bill is to make our existence illegal, to force us back into the closet,” she said.
Republican state Sen. Jason Schultz, who introduced the Senate’s version of the bill, noted that the state’s civil rights code has been cited in some lawsuits and court decisions in favor of trans rights, including a 2023 decision that requires the state’s Medicaid program to cover transition-related care, the Des-Moines Register reported.
“All these legal protections are at risk due to the inclusion of the words ‘gender identity’ in our code,” Schultz said Thursday.
More than 2,000 people rallied to protest the Senate vote Thursday, according to local reports and Planned Parenthood Advocates of Iowa, with signs that read “Trans rights are human rights.” The crowd also booed and yelled at senators following their vote, the Des-Moines Register reported.
Prior to signing the bill, Reynolds said it was meant to bring Iowa in line with federal law and the laws of most states. However, federal law prohibits discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity following the Supreme Court’s 2020 decision in Bostock v. Clayton County.
State and local protections from discrimination based on gender identity vary, with 23 states explicitly prohibiting such discrimination in employment, 22 states prohibiting it in housing and 27 states prohibiting gender identity discrimination in public accommodations, according to the Movement Advancement Project, an LGBTQ think tank.
After Reynolds signed the bill Friday, Wichtendahl told NBC News it felt like a “gut punch,” and that she’s heard from trans constituents who are scared for their lives. She said her message to them is to stand together.
“Refuse to give in to despair, because the greatest act of rebellion that you can do in these dystopian times is to live your life unafraid and be happy,” she said. “And I know after yesterday, that’s a new level of challenge, but it’s the greatest act of rebellion, and the greatest thing that you can do for yourself right now is show the world that you are unafraid to live your life.”
As anti-LGBTQ+ laws take a toll on mental health, the queer community’s response could take a toll on local and state economies.
In the face of over 1,000 anti-LGBTQ+ laws proposed by state legislatures across the U.S. in the past two years, and 126 passed into law, 44.3 percent of LGBTQ+ adults and 63.5 percent of transgender adults now report that the legislation has harmed their or their loved ones’ mental health, according to the Human Rights Campaign’s 2024 Climate Survey. Over 12 percent of LGBTQ+ adults experienced increased harassment, violence, and/or discrimination in the past year, as well as 22.9 percent of trans adults.
Many of the laws explicitly target transgender people through bans on gender-affirming care, sports participation, and bathroom usage. More than 41.1 percent of trans people reported that they and/or someone close to them lost access to gender-affirming care in the last year, and over 28.4 percent reported that they or someone close to them were prevented from accessing restrooms and/or locker rooms, or playing sports.
Shoshana Goldberg, Public Education & Research Program Director at the HRC, tells The Advocate that “when lawmakers pass gender-affirming care bans, they supersede the autonomy and rights of patients, families, and their physicians — often at a significant cost to transgender patients.”
“Research has consistently found that transgender and nonbinary people who are able to access desired gender-affirming care have better mental health outcomes … Those who are unable to access desired care, however, face increased mental distress and suicidality,” she says, adding, “There is also the harm that can result simply from the passage of these bills, through the transphobic rhetoric that arises in discussions of these bills, and the messages they send about the ‘validity’ of transgender people.”
Such laws are short-sighted, Goldberg says, as even if lawmakers do not care about how they affect well-being, they are also likely to impact the economy in the years to come. Half (49.5 percent) of LGBTQ+ adults reported that anti-LGBTQ+ legislation has impacted their choices of where to live and/or work in the last year, including 56.7 percent of trans adults, 43.9 percent of cis LGBQ+ men, and 50.2 percent of cis LGBQ+ women.
Nearly 19 percent of LGBTQ+ adults are currently considering moving to a new state, and 4 percent have already moved to a new state or taken concrete steps to do so.
“The LGBTQ+ Community holds $1.4 trillion in purchasing power, and unsupportive companies stand to lose us as customers — as well as lose allies, particularly Millennials and Gen Z, who data shows are looking to spend their money on those companies that support their values of equality,” Goldberg explains.
Those numbers are likely to increase, as “in addition to losing customers, companies that abandon DEI practices are at risk of being unable to recruit and retain top talent,” Goldberg says. One in 20 (5 percent) of LGBTQ+ adults are trying to change their job because of anti-LGBTQ+ legislation, including over one in 10 (11.1 percent) trans adults. 2.8 percent of LGBTQ+ adults and 5.4 percent of trans adults have already changed their jobs.
“I think states stand to lose economically by continuing to support these laws. They risk losing the tourism and business travel dollars, such as those from the 30 percent of LGBTQ+ adults, in the last year alone, who have avoided, canceled, and/or refused to travel to states with anti-LGBTQ+ legislation,” she says. “They risk losing the taxable income from LGBTQ+ adults, and families of LGBTQ+ youth, who are looking to move to a new state where they and their children can live openly and freely … and companies headquartered in these states risk losing customers.”
While Goldberg’s advice to companies and legislators is to seriously consider the harm their policies do, her advice to LGBTQ+ people is to “find your joy, to fiercely protect it, and to not let this administration or these laws take it away.”
“These attacks are scary and horrible, yes, but our community has been through many of these attacks before, be it the Lavender Scare of the 1950s, the moralizing crusades of Anita Bryant in the1970s, or the AIDS crisis of the 1980s,” Goldberg says. “And each time we got through it, and only emerged stronger. We have always existed, we will always exist, and no law or administration can take that away.”
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.
A disabled college student is speaking out after conservative figures online bullied and mass reported him when he posted about his gender transition.
Micah Leroy, who ran the account known as “Disabled Trans Boy” on Instagram, became the subject of a right-wing hate campaign after he posted a video celebrating his double mastectomy, also know as top surgery. The 19-year-old has cerebral palsy, a group of neurological disorders that affect body movement and muscle coordination, which is the most common lifelong physical disability according to the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke.
“It is important to note that nowhere in this definition does it imply that cerebral palsy negatively impacts an individual’s ability to comprehend the world, make autonomous decisions or understand the concepts of gender and sex,” Leroy told MPR News.
Leroy is a student at the University of Minnesota focusing on disability studies, LGBTQ+ studies and political science. He said that he hopes to one day hold public office, whether in the state legislature or in Congress.
Leroy uses a wheelchair as well as an Eyegaze communication device, though he prefers to communicate with his voice, with the help of his personal care assistants. Leroy, who came out as transgender at the age of 14, emphasized to the outlet that he was the one who sought out and scheduled his medical appointments and took all the steps to legally change his name and gender.
Leroy’s video about his transition went viral, resulting in negative attention from conservative figures such as failed college athlete Riley Gaines, who lied and said Leroy is “non-verbal” while implying doctors performed the surgery without his consent. Georgia Republican Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene called the life-saving procedure performed on a legal adult “criminal.”
Conservatives mass-reported the video, causing it to be removed by Meta, which suspended Leroy’s Facebook and permanently removed his Instagram account for supposedly breaking the platforms’ “Community Standards on child sexual exploitation, abuse and nudity.”
Leroy, who repeated that “I am the one who is posting and I’m over 18,” said that Meta still rejected his appeals, while allowing the abusive comments and messages he received to remain. Still, he said that he hasn’t been deterred from speaking out.
“Even with all the hate this has stirred up, I do believe that any publicity is good publicity in furthering my goals,” Leroy continued. “This experience has only made me want to speak out more about disabled and trans issues as the negative responses I got have shown a side of the world that is intolerant and discriminatory based on what they perceive others can and cannot do.”
President Donald Trump has targeted transgender and nonbinary people with a series of executive orders since he returned to office.
He has done it with strong language. In one executive order, he asserted “medical professionals are maiming and sterilizing a growing number of impressionable children under the radical and false claim that adults can change a child’s sex.”
That’s a dramatic reversal of the policies of former President Joe Biden’s administration — and of major medical organizations — that supported gender-affirming care.
American Civil Liberties Union lawyer Sruti Swaminathan said that to be put into effect, provisions of the orders should first go through federal rulemaking procedures, which can be years long and include the chance for public comment.
“When you have the nation’s commander-in-chief demonizing transgender people, it certainly sends a signal to all Americans,” said Sarah Warbelow, the legal director at Human Rights Campaign.
Things to know about Trump’s actions:
Recognizing people as only men or women
On Trump’s first day back in office, he issued a sweeping order that signaled a big change in how his administration would deal with transgender people and their rights.
The stated purpose is to protect women. “Efforts to eradicate the biological reality of sex fundamentally attack women by depriving them of their dignity, safety, and well-being,” the order says.
The document calls on government agencies to use the new definitions of the sexes, and to stop using taxpayer money to promote what it calls “gender ideology,” the idea broadly accepted by medical experts that gender falls along a spectrum.
Federal agencies have been quick to comply. Andrea Lucas, the acting chair of the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, for example, announced this week that she would remove identity pronouns from employees’ online profiles and disallow the “X” gender marker for those filing discrimination charges.
“Biology is not bigotry. Biological sex is real, and it matters,” Lucas said in a statement.
On Friday, information about what Trump calls “gender ideology” was removed from federal government websites and the term “gender” was replaced by “sex” to comport with the order. The Bureau of Prisons stopped reporting the number of transgender incarcerated people and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention removed lessons on building supportive school environments for transgender and nonbinary students.
Researchers have found less than 1% of adults identify as transgender and under 2% are intersex, or born with physical traits that don’t fit typical definitions for male or female.
Requests denied for passport gender markers
In the order calling for a new federal definition of the sexes, Trump included some specific instances in which policy should be changed, including on passports.
The State Department promptly stopped granting requests for new or updated passports with gender markers that don’t conform with the new definition.
The agency is no longer issuing the documents with an “X” that some people who identify as neither male nor female request and will not honor requests to change the gender markers between “M” and “F” for transgender people.
The option to choose “X” was taken off online passport application forms Friday.
The ACLU says it’s considering a lawsuit.
Trans women moved into men’s prisons
Trump’s initial order called for transgender women in federal custody to be moved to men’s prisons. Warbelow, from Human Rights Campaign, said her organization has received reports from lawyers that some have been.
The Federal Bureau of Prisons did not immediately respond to requests for information about such moves.
There have been at least two lawsuits trying to block the policy. In one, a federal judge has said a transgender woman in a Massachusetts prison should be housed with the general population of a woman’s prison and continue to receive gender-affirming medical care for now.
Opening the door to another ban on trans service members
Trump set the stage for a ban on transgender people in the military, directing Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth to come up with a new policy on the issue by late March.
In the executive order, the president asserted that being transgender “conflicts with a soldier’s commitment to an honorable, truthful, and disciplined lifestyle, even in one’s personal life.”
Trump barred transgender service members in his first term in office, but a court blocked the effort.
A group of active military members promptly sued over the new order this week.
Defunding gender-affirming medical care for trans youth
The care in question includes puberty blocking drugs, hormone therapy and gender-affirming surgery, which is rare for minors.
If fully implemented, the order would cut off government health insurance including Medicaid and TRICARE, which serves military families, for the treatments.
It also calls on Congress to adopt a law against the care, though whether that happens is up to lawmakers.
Twenty-six states already have passed laws banning or limiting gender-affirming care for minors, so the change could be smaller in those places.
Some hospitals have paused some gender-affirming care for people under 19 following the executive order while they evaluate how it might apply to them.
Barring schools from helping student social transitioning
Another executive order seeks to stop “radical indoctrination” in the nation’s school system.
It calls on the Education Department to come up with a policy blocking schools from using federal funds to support students who are socially transitioning or using their curriculum to promote the idea that gender can be fluid, along with certain teachings about race.
The order would block schools from requiring teachers and other school staff to use names and pronouns that align with transgender students’ gender identify rather than the sex they were assigned at birth.
Some districts and states have passed those requirements to prevent deadnaming, the practice of referring to transgender people who have changed their name by the name they used before their transition. It is widely considered insensitive, offensive or traumatizing.
With fear and distress at an all-time high, showing up for trans youth in tangible ways is more critical than ever. The therapists we spoke with shared actionable steps for supporting young trans people in this moment, including, but not limited to:
Acknowledging the executive order and recognizing their feelings about it.
Reaffirming your support. “Remind them of your continued love and support for them and all trans people,” says Brownfield.
Honoring their autonomy. “Listen deeply and validate their fears, pain, and grief—do not minimize their experiences,” says Melody Li, LMFT, a mental health justice activist and founder of Inclusive Therapists. “When the nervous system is overwhelmed, it is natural to feel frozen or detached. Offer to lighten the load by taking action, such as researching resources, peer-support groups, or ways to mobilize in solidarity.”
Helping them access resources. Whether it’s a support group, an affirming therapist, or advocacy organizations, helping trans youth find alternative pathways to care can make all the difference.
Creating a space of belonging. “Facilitating peer connections—whether through online groups, mentorship programs, or supportive networks—can offer trans youth a sense of belonging and shared experience,” says Minor.
Supporting parents and caregivers
The pain of this moment is not limited to trans youth—it extends to their families and loved ones as well. Many parents are grappling with fear, frustration, and uncertainty, wondering how they can protect their children in a country that seems intent on stripping away their rights.
“There is no right or wrong way to process this,” says Minor. “Parents and caregivers need to know that they are allowed to feel whatever they are feeling, and they don’t have to go through it alone.”
For those supporting loved ones of trans youth, Brownfield advises:
Validate their fears and feelings of helplessness.
Remind them they are not alone. “Even with the federal government’s anti-trans hostility, you and many others love their trans kid and love that they affirm their kid,” she says.
Encourage community connection. Minor suggests joining support groups like PFLAG, where parents can share experiences, gain reassurance, and learn advocacy strategies.
