Права трансгендеров в США

В Соединенных Штатах права трансгендеров значительно различаются в зависимости от юрисдикции. В последние десятилетия произошло расширение федеральных, государственных и местных законов и постановлений, направленных на защиту американцев-трансгендеров; однако многие права остаются незащищенными, а некоторые права подвергаются эрозии. С 2020 года существует национальное движение консервативных правых / и организаций , политиков выступающее за права трансгендеров. Ежегодно наблюдается устойчивый рост количества законопроектов, направленных против трансгендеров. особенно в штатах, возглавляемых республиканцами.

Сотрудники-трансгендеры защищены на национальном уровне от дискриминации при приеме на работу после постановления 2020 года , согласно которому Верховный суд постановил, что защита Раздела VII от дискриминации по признаку пола при приеме на работу распространяется на сотрудников-трансгендеров. Закон о равенстве , если он будет принят, запретит дискриминацию по признаку гендерной идентичности в сфере занятости; жилье; общественные помещения; образование; программы, финансируемые из федерального бюджета; кредит; и работа присяжных.

Билль о правах трансгендеров, если он будет принят, внесет поправки в Закон о гражданских правах , запретив дискриминацию по признаку пола, усилит запрет на дискриминацию в здравоохранении по признаку гендерной идентичности и внесет поправки в федеральные законы об образовании, чтобы обеспечить защиту транс-студентов от дискриминация. Этот законопроект также позволяет учащимся присоединяться к спортивным командам, соответствующим их гендерной идентичности, и защищает доступ к гендерно-подтверждающему уходу для несовершеннолетних и взрослых, что впоследствии отменяет различные запреты, принятые на уровне штата консервативными законодательными органами по всей стране. Он также на федеральном уровне запрещает практику конверсионной терапии и принудительные операции на интерсекс-детях, а также инвестирует в общественные услуги для предотвращения насилия в отношении трансгендеров и небинарных людей и требует от Генерального прокурора назначить в Отделе гражданских прав Министерства юстиции ответственного за консультирование. и надзор за соблюдением гражданских прав трансгендеров.

В большинстве штатов разрешается обновлять гендерную идентичность в свидетельствах о рождении и водительских правах , хотя некоторые требуют подтверждения факта проведения операции по подтверждению пола или вообще запрещают обновление этих полей. Некоторые штаты юридически признают небинарных граждан и предлагают знак «X» на документах, удостоверяющих личность. Половая самоидентификация (включая опцию «X») разрешена для паспортов . Законы, касающиеся изменения имен в юрисдикциях США, также представляют собой сложное сочетание федеральных правил и правил штата.

Решение Верховного суда по делу Обергефелл против Ходжеса установило, что равная защита требует, чтобы все юрисдикции признавали однополые браки , предоставляя трансгендерам право вступать в брак независимо от того, считаются ли их партнеры по закону однополыми или разнополыми. Закон Мэтью Шепарда и Джеймса Берда-младшего о предотвращении преступлений на почве ненависти жертвы , мотивированные фактическим или предполагаемым полом , сексуальной ориентацией , гендерной идентичностью или инвалидностью 2009 года добавил к федеральному определению преступления на почве ненависти преступления . Однако лишь некоторые штаты и территории включают гендерную идентичность в свои законы о преступлениях на почве ненависти.

На всей территории Соединенных Штатов права трансгендеров являются мишенью консерваторов и Республиканской партии . Ограничения и запреты на гендерно-подтверждающий уход, гормональную терапию и драг-терапию распространены в красных штатах наряду с на гомосексуалистов , ориентированной литературой , а академические учебные программы (т.е. исследования гендера и сексуальности и т. д.) были запрещены правительствами штатов в государственных школах .

Свадьба

В деле Обергефелл против Ходжеса суд постановил, что люди имеют право вступать в брак независимо от пола. Хотя это обычно понимается как постановление, разрешающее однополые браки, это также означало, что пол человека, независимо от того, был ли он присвоен при рождении или признан после перехода, не может использоваться для определения его права на вступление в брак. До этого постановления право трансгендеров на вступление в брак часто подвергалось юридическим оспариваниям, как и статус их браков после перехода, особенно в тех случаях, когда пол человека при рождении интерпретировался как означающий, что однополый брак имел место.

Случаи

В 1959 году Кристине Йоргенсен , транс-женщине , клерк в Нью-Йорке отказал в разрешении на брак на том основании, что в ее свидетельстве о рождении она была указана как мужчина; Йоргенсен не стал обращаться в суд. Позже в том же году Шарлотта Маклеод, еще одна транс-женщина, перенесшая операцию по смене пола, вышла замуж за своего мужа Ральфа Х. Хайделя в Майами. Однако она не упомянула свой пол при рождении или тот факт, что по закону она все еще была мужчиной. В 1976 году в деле «МТ против Джей Ти» в Нью-Джерси было установлено, что трансгендеры, перенесшие операцию по смене пола, могут вступать в брак по законному полу, соответствующему их гендерной идентичности, что стало первым постановлением такого рода. В данном случае суд прямо рассмотрел решение «Инглиш Корбетт против Корбетта», но отклонил его мотивировку.

В деле Литтлтон против Прейнджа (1999 г. ) Кристи Ли Литтлтон, транс-женщина, перенесшая операцию по смене пола, утверждала в 4-м апелляционном суде Техаса, что ее брак с ее генетическим мужем-мужчиной (умершим) был юридически обязательным и, следовательно, она имела право на его имущество. Суд решил, что пол истицы соответствует ее хромосомам: XY (мужские). Впоследствии суд признал недействительной ее исправление в свидетельстве о рождении, а также ее лицензию на брак в Кентукки, постановив: «С точки зрения закона мы считаем, что Кристи Литтлтон является мужчиной. Будучи мужчиной, Кристи не может быть замужем за другим мужчиной. Брак с Джонатоном был недействителен, и она не может предъявить иск как его пережившая супруга». Она подала апелляцию в Верховный суд, но в 2000 году он отказал в удовлетворении дела.

Решение Апелляционного суда Канзаса по делу In re Estate of Gardiner (2001 г.) рассмотрел и отклонил Литтлтона , отдав предпочтение MT v. JT . В этом деле Апелляционный суд Канзаса пришел к выводу, что «суд первой инстанции должен рассмотреть и решить, был ли человек мужчиной или женщиной на момент выдачи ему свидетельства о браке и вступления в брак, а не просто то, какие у него были хромосомы или не были в момент рождения. Суд может использовать состав хромосом как один, но не исключительный фактор при вынесении решения. Помимо хромосом, мы принимаем критерии, установленные профессором Гринбергом в суде первой инстанции. направлено на рассмотрение факторов, помимо состава хромосом, в том числе: пол гонад, внутренний морфологический пол, внешний морфологический пол, гормональный пол, фенотипический пол, назначенный пол и пол воспитания, а также сексуальную идентичность». В 2002 году Верховный суд Канзаса частично отменил решение Апелляционного суда вслед за Литтлтоном .

Дело об опеке над Майклом Кантарасом попало в общенациональные новости. Кантарас познакомился с женщиной и подал на развод в 1998 году, потребовав основной опеки над детьми. Хотя он выиграл это дело в 2002 году, оно было отменено в апелляционном порядке в 2004 году Вторым окружным апелляционным судом Флориды . поддержав утверждение Форсайта о том, что брак был недействителен, поскольку ее бывший муж все еще был женщиной, а однополые браки были незаконными во Флориде. Рассмотрение было отклонено Верховным судом Флориды .

В отношении Хосе Маурисио ЛОВО-Лара (2005) , Апелляционный совет по иммиграционным делам постановил, что для целей иммиграционной визы «Брак между послеоперационным транссексуалом и лицом противоположного пола может быть основанием для получения льгот согласно…, если государство, в котором произошел брак, признает изменение в поле послеоперационного транссексуала и считает этот брак действительным гетеросексуальным браком».

В деле «Филдс против Смита» (2006 г.) три трансгендерные женщины подали иск против штата Висконсин за принятие закона, запрещающего гормональное лечение или операции по смене пола для заключенных. Апелляционные суды отменили закон, устанавливающий, что трансгендеры имеют право на медицинскую помощь в тюрьме.

Родители-трансгендеры добиваются опеки над детьми

Судам, как правило, разрешается основывать решения об опеке или посещении только на факторах, которые напрямую затрагивают интересы ребенка. Согласно этому принципу, если невозможно доказать, что гендерная идентичность родителя-трансгендера причиняет вред ребенку, контакт не должен ограничиваться, а другие постановления об опеке и посещении не должны изменяться по этой причине. Многие суды поддержали этот принцип и рассматривали дела об опеке над трансгендерами так же, как и любое другое решение об опеке над детьми, уделяя особое внимание стандартным факторам, таким как родительские навыки. в деле Мэйфилд против Мэйфилда Например, суд поддержал план совместного воспитания родителей-трансгендеров , поскольку в протоколах не было доказательств того, что родитель не будет «подходящим, любящим и способным родителем».

В других случаях суды, утверждающие, что учитывают интересы ребенка, выносят решения против родителя-трансгендера, что приводит к тому, что родитель теряет доступ к своим детям на основании своей гендерной идентичности . Например, в деле «Чисек против Чисека » суд лишил родителя-трансгендера права на посещение, постановив, что существует риск нанесения психического и «социального вреда» детям. Суд спросил, была ли смена пола родителя «простым проявлением какой-то фантазии». Суд штата Огайо наложил бессрочный мораторий на посещения, основываясь на убеждении суда, что детям будет эмоционально сложно видеть «своего отца женщиной».

Репродуктивные права

Во многих юрисдикциях США требуется операция по подтверждению пола, прежде чем можно будет изменить юридический пол человека. Это подверглось критике как принудительная стерилизация . Некоторые трансгендеры желают сохранить способность к деторождению. не требуются гистерэктомия , фаллопластика , метоидиопластика , пенэктомия , орхиэктомия или вагинопластика Другим для лечения гендерной дисфории . В этих случаях хирургическое вмешательство считается ненужным с медицинской точки зрения и по этой причине неэтичным с медицинской точки зрения. Кроме того, хирургическое вмешательство, как правило, представляет собой заключительную серию медицинских процедур в процессе полной смены пола и для многих людей является непомерно дорогостоящей с финансовой точки зрения.

Некоторые трансгендеры прибегают к услугам вспомогательных репродуктивных технологий и сохранению репродуктивных тканей перед операцией, которая может сделать их бесплодными. В зависимости от того, какой тип гамет естественным образом вырабатывает организм человека, это может включать криоконсервацию спермы в банке спермы или сохранение ооцитов или яйцеклеток . Таким людям суррогатного материнства и экстракорпорального оплодотворения для рождения детей необходим доступ к услугам . Некоторые люди специально выступают за то, чтобы трансгендеры имели законное право на эти услуги.

Документы, удостоверяющие личность

Документы, удостоверяющие личность, являются основной областью юридической озабоченности для трансгендеров. Существуют различные процедуры и требования к изменению юридического имени и гендерного маркера в свидетельствах о рождении , водительских правах , удостоверениях социального страхования и паспортах , которые могут быть противоречивыми. Во многих штатах исторически требовалась операция по смене пола, чтобы изменить свое имя и гендерный маркер; однако штатов, где это происходит, становится все меньше, причем Алабама является одним из последних. Кроме того, документы, которые не совпадают друг с другом, могут создавать трудности при ведении личных дел, особенно те, которые требуют нескольких совпадающих форм идентификации. Кроме того, сообщалось, что наличие документов, не соответствующих гендерной принадлежности человека, приводит к преследованию и дискриминации .

Изменение имени

Трансгендеры часто добиваются юридического признания смены имени во время смены пола. Законы об изменении имени различаются в зависимости от штата. В некоторых штатах трансгендеры могут изменить свое имя при условии, что это изменение не приведет к мошенничеству или преступным намерениям. В других штатах этот процесс требует постановления суда или закона и может быть более сложным. От заявителя могут потребовать опубликовать в газетах официальные объявления с объявлением об изменении имени — правила, которые подвергались критике из-за права на неприкосновенность частной жизни и потенциально подвергали трансгендеров опасности целенаправленных преступлений на почве ненависти. Некоторые суды требуют медицинскую или психиатрическую документацию для обоснования смены имени, несмотря на отсутствие аналогичных требований к лицам, меняющим имена по причинам, отличным от смены пола.

Свидетельства о рождении

Законодательные требования каждого штата к изменению пола в свидетельстве о рождении по состоянию на май 2023 г.

  Штат не требует «операции по смене пола» (SRS) для изменения пола в свидетельстве о рождении.

  Для изменения пола в свидетельстве о рождении требуется СГД

  Государство не меняет пол в свидетельствах о рождении трансгендеров

  Неясно из-за конфликта между законодательством штата и судебными постановлениями.

Процедура, которую каждый штат использует для изменения пола в свидетельстве о рождении по состоянию на сентябрь 2021 года.

  Новое свидетельство о рождении выдано с правильным указанием пола.

  В старое свидетельство о рождении исправлено указание пола

  Государство не меняет пол в свидетельствах о рождении трансгендеров

Штаты США принимают собственные законы о свидетельствах о рождении , а суды штатов выносят различные постановления в отношении трансгендеров.

В большинстве штатов разрешено изменение имени и пола в свидетельстве о рождении либо путем внесения изменений в существующее свидетельство о рождении, либо путем выдачи нового, хотя в некоторых для этого требуется медицинское подтверждение операции по смене пола. К ним относятся:

• Техас, по мнению местной канцелярии, изменит пол по решению суда.
• В 2014 году штат Нью-Йорк и город Нью-Йорк приняли закон, упрощающий процесс смены пола в свидетельстве о рождении и устраняющий требование подтверждения операции.
• Невада отменила требование о хирургическом вмешательстве в ноябре 2016 года. Для этого требуются письменные показания от лица, вносящего изменения, и письменные показания, которые могут подтвердить точность информации.
• Колорадо (февраль 2019 г.) и Нью-Мексико (ноябрь 2019 г.) отменили требование хирургического вмешательства и сделали доступным гендерный маркер «X».
• Канзас начал разрешать изменение гендерного маркера в июне 2019 года. Человек должен подписать письменные показания. Если у них еще нет документов (водительских прав или паспорта) с указанием предпочтительного пола, они должны принести справку от врача или психотерапевта, подтверждающую их пол, но им не нужны доказательства перенесенной операции. Правила были установлены в соответствии с указом, для Министерства здравоохранения штата Канзас подписанным губернатором Канзаса . В 2023 году это было изменено, и департамент здравоохранения штата объявил, что больше не будет выдавать новые свидетельства о рождении с измененными гендерными маркерами в связи с недавно принятым законом штата.
• Вирджиния отменила требование проведения операции по смене гендерного маркера в сентябре 2020 года.

Теннесси не будет менять пол в свидетельстве о рождении ни при каких обстоятельствах. В декабре 2020 года федеральный судья признал недействительным неконституционное ведомственное правило, запрещающее изменение пола в свидетельстве о рождении человека в штате Огайо . В 2022 году Оклахома стала вторым штатом, запретившим изменение гендерного маркера в свидетельствах о рождении. Это последовало за указом губернатора, изданным годом ранее. Законопроект Сената Оклахомы № 1100 также запретил небинарные гендерные маркеры в свидетельствах о рождении. В том же году Монтана также издала правило, запрещающее изменение пола в свидетельствах о рождении.

Случаи

Первым делом, рассматривавшим возможность юридического изменения пола в США, стал Mtr. дело Аноним против Вайнера (1966 г.) , в котором женщина-трансгендер хотела изменить свое имя и пол в свидетельстве о рождении в Нью-Йорке после операции по смене пола. Департамент здравоохранения Нью-Йорка отклонил эту просьбу. Она подала дело в суд, но суд постановил, что Кодекс здравоохранения города Нью-Йорка не разрешает такой запрос, который разрешает изменение пола в свидетельстве о рождении только в том случае, если была допущена ошибка при записи его при рождении.

Решение суда по делу Вайнера было вновь подтверждено в деле Мтр. дела Хартин против Дира. из Бур. Рек. (1973) и Аноним против Меллона (1977) . Несмотря на это, с течением времени можно отметить растущую поддержку, выраженную в решениях судов Нью-Йорка, разрешающих вносить изменения в свидетельства о рождении, хотя они по-прежнему считали, что это потребует законодательных действий. Классификация характерного пола является вопросом общественного здравоохранения в Нью-Йорке; В городе Нью-Йорке есть собственный департамент здравоохранения, который действует отдельно и автономно от департамента здравоохранения штата Нью-Йорк.

Важным делом в Коннектикуте было дело Дарнелл против Ллойда (1975 г.) . где суд установил, что для оправдания отказа в изменении пола, записанного в свидетельстве о рождении, необходимо продемонстрировать существенный государственный интерес.

В деле К. против Отдела здравоохранения (1977 г. ) Верховный суд штата Орегон отклонил заявление об изменении имени или пола в свидетельстве о рождении трансгендерного мужчины, перенесшего операцию по смене пола, на том основании, что не было законодательных полномочий для внесения такого изменения.

Водительские права

По состоянию на февраль 2024 года все штаты США, за исключением Канзаса и Флориды, разрешают менять гендерный маркер в водительских правах, хотя требования для этого различаются в зависимости от штата. Зачастую требования к смене водительских прав менее строгие, чем к смене отметки в свидетельстве о рождении. Например, до 1 августа 2015 года в штате Массачусетс требовалась операция по смене пола . для смены свидетельства о рождении но только форма, включающая заявление врача под присягой о том, что заявитель на самом деле принадлежит к новому полу, чтобы исправить указание пола в водительских правах. По состоянию на ноябрь 2019 года Содружество Массачусетс больше не требует какой-либо документации или заявления под присягой от врача для изменения гендерного маркера в водительских правах / удостоверении личности штата. Чтобы изменить гендерный маркер, нужно всего лишь заполнить заявление на новое водительское удостоверение/удостоверение личности, указав правильную информацию. В штате Вирджиния действовала политика, аналогичная политике Массачусетса, согласно которой для смены свидетельства о рождении требовалась операция по смене пола (SRS) , но не для смены водительских прав. Вирджиния отменила требование проведения операции по смене гендерного маркера в сентябре 2020 года.

Иногда требования и законы штатов противоречат друг другу и зависят друг от друга; например, женщина-трансгендер, родившаяся в Теннесси, но проживающая в Кентукки, не сможет изменить гендерный маркер в своих водительских правах в Кентукки. Это связано с тем, что Кентукки требует исправленного свидетельства о рождении, отражающего точный пол человека, но штат Теннесси вообще не меняет гендерные маркеры в свидетельствах о рождении.

1 июля 2023 года вступил в силу законопроект № 180 Сената Канзаса, предписывающий, чтобы гендерные маркеры в свидетельствах о рождении и водительских правах отражали пол человека при рождении, что отменяет решение федерального иска о равной защите 2019 года, которое разрешало изменять свидетельства о рождении, чтобы отразить пол человека. гендерная идентичность.

В январе 2024 года Флорида запретила менять гендерный маркер в водительских правах. Кроме того, любой человек, «искажающий» свой пол, будет подвергнут уголовному и гражданскому наказанию.

Кроме того, ряд штатов и городских юрисдикций приняли законы, разрешающие использование третьего гендерного маркера в официальных документах, удостоверяющих личность (см. ниже).

Случаи

В мае 2015 года шесть трансгендеров из Мичигана подали иск Лав против Джонсона в Окружной суд США Восточного округа Мичигана , оспаривая политику штата, требующую, чтобы информация в водительских правах человека соответствовала информации в его свидетельстве о рождении. Эта политика требует, чтобы трансгендеры изменили информацию в своих свидетельствах о рождении, чтобы сменить водительские права, что на момент подачи заявки было невозможно в Теннесси, Небраске и Огайо, где родились трое истцов, и требует постановления суда. в Южной Каролине, где родился четвертый. Остальные двое жителей родились в Мичигане, и им придется пройти операцию по смене свидетельств о рождении. Истцов по делу представляет Американский союз гражданских свобод .

В ноябре 2015 года судья Нэнси Эдмундс отклонила ходатайство штата Мичиган о прекращении дела.

Паспорта

Госдепартамент определяет , какие идентификационные биографические данные размещаются в паспортах.

30 июня 2021 года правительство объявило, что Государственный департамент начнет предлагать гендерный маркер «X», а также разрешит менять гендерный маркер без доказательства каких-либо физических изменений пола. Ранее, 10 июня 2010 г., в политику были внесены поправки, разрешающие постоянные изменения гендерных маркеров только в том случае, если они сопровождаются заявлением врача о том, что «заявитель прошел соответствующее клиническое лечение для перехода к новому полу». До 2010 года требуемое заявление было более конкретным; оно должно было быть от хирурга, который сказал, что операция по смене пола завершена.

С 11 апреля 2022 года любое лицо, имеющее действующий паспорт США, может по закону иметь варианты F, M или X, указанные в качестве маркера пола / гендера, доступные и признаваемые в порядке самоопределения. С конца 2023 года X также будет доступен для паспортных карточек, экстренных паспортов, изготовленных консульствами и посольствами, консульских отчетов о рождении за рубежом.

Лица, не родившиеся в Соединенных Штатах

Лица, не родившиеся в Соединенных Штатах и ​​имеющие статус в Соединенных Штатах, могут изменить гендерный маркер в своем Свидетельстве о натурализации, выданном USCIS, Свидетельстве о гражданстве, Карте постоянного жителя и консульском отчете о рождении за границей, выданном Государственным департаментом; они служат основными документами, удостоверяющими личность, которые могут заменить свидетельства о рождении.

Другие варианты включают получение постановления суда штата, подтверждающего смену юридического пола в качестве связующего документа, например, Постановления штата Калифорния о признании изменения пола.

Вариант третьего пола

Штаты с X гендерными маркерами в водительских правах по состоянию на апрель 2022 г.

  Штаты с обозначением X, доступным в водительских правах

  Вступает в силу в 2024 году

  Дата поступления еще не определена

  Обозначение X недоступно

Основная статья: Юридическое признание небинарного пола § США

С 2021 года федеральное правительство США признает третий вариант пола в паспортах или других национальных документах, удостоверяющих личность, присоединившись к другим странам, включая Австралию , Новую Зеландию , Индию , Непал , Пакистан , Бангладеш , Германию , Мальту и Канаду , которые также признают это. Представители третьего пола традиционно признавались в ряде индейских культур как люди « двух духов », в традиционной гавайской культуре как маху и как фаафафины в Американском Самоа . иммигранты из традиционных культур, признающих третий пол Аналогичным образом, от такой реформы выиграют , включая гендер мультиксе на юге Мексики и хиджру в южноазиатских культурах.

10 июня 2016 года окружной суд штата Орегон постановил, что жительница Элиза Рэй Шупе может получить небинарное гендерное обозначение. Центр права трансгендеров считает, что это «первое решение такого рода в США».

26 сентября 2016 года интерсекс- жительница Калифорнии Сара Келли Кинан стала вторым человеком в Соединенных Штатах, законно изменившим свой пол на «небинарный», сославшись на случай Шупе как на источник вдохновения. Кинан получил свидетельство о рождении с маркером интерсекс- пола. В 2012 году Огайо выпустил маркер пола «гермафродита».

был внесен законопроект 26 января 2017 года в Сенат штата Калифорния , который создаст третий, небинарный гендерный маркер в свидетельствах о рождении Калифорнии, водительских правах и удостоверениях личности. Законопроект SB 179 также отменяет требования к заключению врача и обязательному судебному слушанию по петициям об изменении пола. Этот законопроект был подписан 15 октября 2017 года; небинарный вариант стал доступен 1 ​​января 2019 года.

15 июня 2017 года Орегон стал первым штатом США, объявившим, что разрешит использование недвоичного гендерного маркера «X» на удостоверениях личности штата и водительских правах. Закон вступил в силу 1 июля. Для внесения изменений справка от врача не требуется. На следующей неделе Вашингтон, округ Колумбия , объявил, что очень скоро будет предлагаться небинарный гендерный маркер «X» для выдаваемых округом удостоверений личности и водительских прав без необходимости медицинской сертификации. Изменение политики округа Колумбия вступило в силу 27 июня, в результате чего округ стал первым местом в США, предлагающим гендерно-нейтральные водительские права и удостоверения личности. В июне 2018 года штат Мэн начал выпускать желтые наклейки, закрывающие часть удостоверения личности, с надписью «Пол изменен на: X – небинарный». В июле 2018 года Нью-Джерси принял закон, разрешающий людям вносить изменения в свидетельства о рождении и смерти, чтобы отразить их личность как женщину, мужчину или «неуказанную личность», не требуя от врача предоставления доказательств перенесенной операции. В октябре 2018 года сообщалось, что Миннесота будет предлагать букву «X» как часть REAL ID . С ноября 2018 года в Колорадо по закону указан пол X в бланках водительских прав и других удостоверениях личности.

Законодательство, предусматривающее гендерный маркер «X» на удостоверениях личности жителей, было принято в штате Нью-Йорк в июне 2017 года. (и был представлен в Нью-Йорке в июне 2018 года), и в Массачусетсе в мае 2018 года. В январе 2019 года в Нью-Йорке начали предлагать свидетельства о рождении с гендерным маркером «X». Огайо начал предлагать гендерный маркер «X» в августе 2020 года.

27 октября 2021 года Госдепартамент выдал первый паспорт с гендерным маркером «Х».

Юрисдикции США с водительскими правами «пола X»

Многие юрисдикции США в настоящее время предлагают маркеры третьего пола на водительских правах. включая Арканзас , Калифорния , Колорадо , Коннектикут , Делавэр , Вашингтон , округ Колумбия, Гавайи , Массачусетс , Мэн , Мэриленд , Мичиган , Миннесота , Невада , Нью-Гэмпшир , Нью-Джерси , Нью-Йорк , Огайо , Орегон , Пенсильвания , Род-Айленд , Юта , Вирджиния , Вермонт и Вашингтон .

Законы, предлагающие гендерный маркер «X» на водительских правах и удостоверениях личности штата, также были приняты в нескольких юрисдикциях США, но еще не вступили в силу, а именно — Нью-Джерси и Иллинойс (где-то в 2024 г. из-за задержек по государственным контрактам от третьих сторон).

Свидетельства о смерти

Исследование, проведенное эпидемиологами штата Орегон, показало, что в районе Портленда, штат Орегон, более половины умерших трансгендеров были записаны в свидетельствах о смерти с указанием пола, присвоенного им при рождении.

Жилье

По данным исследования здоровья трансгендеров в США, проведенного в 2015 году, 30% трансгендеров (41% среди чернокожих трансгендеров) в какой-то момент своей жизни сталкиваются с бездомностью. По данным Института Вера , трансгендеры в кризисных центрах и приютах регулярно подвергаются словесному и физическому насилию.

В 2020 году администрация Трампа отменила меры защиты трансгендеров времен Обамы, защищающие равный доступ к приютам для бездомных, и выпустила руководство для сотрудников приютов о том, как распознать трансженщин. В 2021 году памятка HUD расширила Правило равного доступа 2012 года, объявив равный доступ для всех людей к программам HUD, включая дочерние приюты, независимо от фактической или предполагаемой сексуальной ориентации, гендерной идентичности или семейного положения.

Геноцид

Основная статья: Геноцид трансгендеров

Некоторые критики, в том числе журналисты Эмили Сент-Джеймс и Саид Джонс , а также активист Чейз Стрэнджио ООН , охарактеризовали законы США как соответствующие определению геноцида , например, те законы, которые запрещают надлежащее медицинское обслуживание трансгендеров («причинение серьезного телесного или психического вреда членам организации»). умышленное создание группе условий жизни, рассчитанных на полное или частичное ее физическое уничтожение»), а также те, которые требуют от государства отобрать детей-трансгендеров («насильственная передача детей из группы в другую группу); ").

3 марта 2023 года на Конференции консервативных политических действий политический обозреватель Майкл Ноулз заявил, что «ради блага общества... трансгендеризм должен быть полностью искоренен из общественной жизни». Это заявление и другие части его речи побудили Институт Лемкина по предотвращению геноцида поднять в США «тревогу красного флага», заявив: «Теперь, когда идеологи ненависти могут открыто призывать к искоренению трансгендерной идентичности – в самой стране это было наиболее открыто для трансгендерного сообщества за последнее десятилетие – мы находимся на новом этапе глобальной угрозы трансгендерам».

Представители медицинского сообщества назвали запреты на медицинскую помощь трансгендерам ужасными. В медицинском отчете, опубликованном Йельским университетом в ответ на запреты на уход, подтверждающий гендер, утверждается, что эти запреты не более этичны, чем запрет на медицинское обслуживание при любом другом опасном для жизни заболевании. Президент Всемирной профессиональной ассоциации здоровья трансгендеров (WPATH) написала в газете New York Times авторскую статью , в которой высказала свое мнение о том, что эти законы представляют собой попытку «избавить мир от трансгендеров». Аналогичные настроения были выражены в публичном коммюнике WPATH: «Законодательство о здравоохранении, направленное против трансгендеров, направлено не на защиту детей, а на устранение трансгендеров на микро- и макроуровне».

Согласно юридическому определению преступлений против человечности , которое пропагандируется в Гааге Международным уголовным судом , « истребление » включает в себя умышленное создание условий жизни, в частности лишениедоступ к продовольствию и лекарствам, рассчитанный на уничтожение части населения», когда «во исполнение или в целяхсодействие политике государства или организации по совершению такого нападения».

Правительственные списки трансгендеров

Составление правительствами списков граждан-трансгендеров, таких как список, составленный штатом Техас в 2022 году, подвергся критике со стороны транс-защитников, опасавшихся, что государство «использует эту информацию для дальнейшего преследования и без того уязвимого транс-сообщества».

В июне 2023 года Генеральная прокуратура штата Теннесси поручила Медицинскому центру Университета Вандербильта передать медицинские карты всех своих пациентов-трансгендеров. VUMC подчинился.

Физическое насилие

Отчет Министерства юстиции за 2014 год показал, что 2% трансгендеров сообщают о физическом нападении при посещении кабинета врача, а 3% сообщают, что их насильно подвергали нежелательным медицинским процедурам.

Согласно исследованию, опубликованному Калифорнийского университета в Лос-Анджелесе Институтом Уильямса , трансгендеры становятся жертвами насильственных преступлений более чем в четыре раза чаще, чем цисгендеры. Исследование показало, что с 2017 по 2018 год трансгендеры подвергались насильственным преследованиям со скоростью 86,2 на 1000 человек по сравнению с 21,7 среди цисгендеров. Транс-женщины страдали с частотой 86,1 на 1000 по сравнению с 23,7 цис-женщин, а транс-мужчины страдали с частотой 107,5 на 1000 по сравнению с 19,8 цис-мужчинами.

По данным Министерства юстиции, в 2022 году 50% людей, погибших в результате преступлений на почве ненависти против ЛГБТ, являются трансженщинами, при этом сексуальное насилие является частым явлением после их убийств. Кроме того, 50% трансгендеров подвергаются физическому насилию после того, как признались своим близким в том, что они трансгендеры.

В июне 2022 года канал NBC сообщил, что «Мероприятия в защиту прав трансгендеров (…) стали частыми объектами экстремистов, ополченцев и крайне правых деятелей».

В августе 2022 года проект отчета Генеральной прокуратуры Калифорнии показал, что вероятность того, что трансгендеры будут остановлены полицией по «обоснованным подозрениям», в четыре раза выше, чем у цисгендеров.

Сексуальное насилие

По данным Министерства юстиции, в 2022 году 66% трансгендеров в какой-то момент своей жизни подвергались сексуальному насилию. 15% трансгендеров сообщают о сексуальном насилии со стороны полиции или тюремного персонала (32% афроамериканских трансгендеров), а еще 10% сообщают о сексуальном насилии со стороны медицинских работников. Более раннее исследование, проведенное Министерством юстиции в 2014 году, также показало, что специалисты-психиатры нередко требуют от своих транс-пациентов оказывать им сексуальные услуги в обмен на постоянный доступ к гендерно-подтверждающему здравоохранению.

о торговле людьми В докладе Государственного департамента показано, что трансгендеры значительно перепредставлены среди жертв торговли людьми в целях сексуальной эксплуатации, а исследование Чикагского университета Лойолы показало, что трансгендеры в США в 5,6 раза чаще занимаются сексом для выживания – там, где сексом торгуют. за деньги, еду, кров или другие предметы первой необходимости, такие как телефоны или одежда, чем их сверстники из СНГ.

Согласно опросу трансгендеров, проведенному в США в 2015 году, 13% учащихся K-12, которые считались трансгендерами или считались ими, подверглись сексуальному насилию именно из-за того, что они были трансгендерами.

Считается, что трансгендеры подвергаются обыскам и вторичным досмотрам во время прохождения контроля в аэропорту довольно часто из-за того, что их тип телосложения отличается от предварительных настроек, ожидаемых сканерами тела. Эти обыски могут варьироваться от ощупывания в области паха до принуждения полностью раздеться.

Государства перемещения и убежища

Антитрансгендерное законодательство во многих консервативных штатах заставило некоторых трансгендеров и их семьи бежать из своих домов, будь то в другой штат или другую страну, включая семьи тех, кто активно выступал против антитрансгендерных законов в своих штатах.

Ряд штатов приняли законы, защищающие трансгендеров и их семьи, а также их медицинских работников, спасающихся от экстрадиции из антитрансгендерных государств. В 2022 году Коннектикут стал первым штатом, принявшим такой закон наряду с аналогичными мерами защиты поставщиков и получателей репродуктивной помощи. С тех пор аналогичные законы были приняты в Массачусетсе, Калифорнии, Иллинойсе, Миннесоте, Нью-Джерси, Нью-Мексико, Вермонте, Колорадо, Вашингтоне, Нью-Йорке, Аризоне, Мэн, Род-Айленде, Орегоне, Мэриленде и округе Колумбия.

В июне 2023 года опрос Data for Progress показал, что 8% взрослых трансгендеров в США были вынуждены покинуть свое сообщество или штат из-за враждебного законодательства.

Защита от дискриминации

Работа

Права трансгендеров на трудоустройство в США до вынесения решения по делу RG & GR Harris Funeral Homes Inc. против Комиссии по равным возможностям трудоустройства .

  Дискриминация запрещена в сфере государственной и частной занятости

  Дискриминация запрещена только в сфере государственной занятости

  Нет перечисленных защит

В июне 2020 года суд впервые вынес решение по делу, непосредственно касающемуся прав трансгендеров. В деле RG & GR Harris Funeral Homes Inc. против Комиссии по равным возможностям трудоустройства Верховный суд постановил, что Раздел VII Закона о гражданских правах 1964 года расширяет защиту лиц, являющихся трансгендерами при трудоустройстве. Это основано на дискриминации по признаку трансгендерного статуса и является формой дискриминации по признаку пола. До постановления о том, что защита Раздела VII распространялась на статус трансгендера, четыре штата (Аляска, Аризона, Висконсин и Миссури) не вводили в действие специальные меры защиты, основанные на статусе трансгендера в любой сфере занятости, а 22 штата распространяли защиту только на работу в государственных учреждениях.

Законы

Государства, запрещающие жилищную дискриминацию по признаку гендерной идентичности . Правила HUD требуют, чтобы все поставщики жилья, получающие финансирование HUD, не допускали дискриминации по гендерной идентичности человека по состоянию на июнь 2020 года.

  Запрещает жилищную дискриминацию по признаку гендерной идентичности.

  Нет перечисленных защит

Федеральные законы

Не существует федерального закона, определяющего трансгендеров как защищенный класс или конкретно требующего равного обращения с трансгендерами. Некоторые версии Закона о недискриминации в сфере занятости, представленные Конгрессу США, включают защиту от дискриминации трансгендеров, но по состоянию на 2021 год ни одна версия ENDA не была принята. Вопрос о том, включать или нет такую ​​формулировку, был спорной частью дебатов по законопроекту. В 2016 и 2017 годах член палаты представителей Пит Олсон [республиканец от штата Техас] представил закон, строго интерпретирующий гендерную идентичность в соответствии с биологией , что положило бы конец федеральной защите гражданских прав гендерной идентичности. На федеральном уровне по-прежнему разрешено родителям подвергать детей-трансгендеров конверсионной терапии .

4 октября 2017 года генеральный прокурор Джефф Сешнс опубликовал меморандум Министерства юстиции , в котором говорится, что Раздел VII Закона о гражданских правах 1964 года запрещает дискриминацию по признаку пола, который, по его словам, «обычно определяется как биологический мужчина или женщина», но закон «не запрещает дискриминацию по признаку гендерной идентичности как таковой ».

30 января 2012 года секретарь HUD Шон Донован объявил о новых правилах, которые потребуют от всех поставщиков жилья, получающих финансирование HUD, предотвращать жилищную дискриминацию по признаку сексуальной ориентации или гендерной идентичности. Эти правила вступили в силу 5 марта 2012 года.

Государственные и местные законы

Более 225 юрисдикций, включая округ Колумбия (по состоянию на 2016 г.) а в 22 штатах (по состоянию на 2018 год) действует законодательство, запрещающее дискриминацию по признаку гендерной идентичности при трудоустройстве, жилье и/или общественных местах. В Анкоридже, Аляска, в апреле 2018 года избиратели решили сохранить существующие меры защиты трансгендеров. В Массачусетсе закон штата запрещает дискриминацию в общественных местах по признаку гендерной идентичности; В октябре 2016 года активисты, выступающие против трансгендеров, представили минимальное количество подписей, необходимое секретарю Содружества штата Массачусетс, чтобы подать закон на отмену в ходе голосования по всему штату. 6 ноября 2018 года избиратели Массачусетса решили сохранить закон штата: 68% высказались за сохранение закона, а 32% выступили против. Инициатива Массачусетса по борьбе с гендерной идентичностью по борьбе с дискриминацией была первым вопросом такого рода в масштабах штата в Соединенных Штатах .

В некоторых штатах и ​​городах конверсионная терапия запрещена для несовершеннолетних .

Состояние	Дата вступления в силу	Работа	Жилье	Общественные помещения
Миннесота	1993
Род-Айленд	6 декабря 1995 г. (общественное размещение) 17 июля 2001 г. (работа и жилье)
Нью-Мексико	1 июля 2003 г. (работа и жилье) 2004 г. (общественное размещение)
Калифорния	2004 г. (занятость и жилье) 9 октября 2011 г. (общественные помещения)
Округ Колумбия	2005 г. (занятость и жилье) 8 марта 2006 г. (общественные помещения)
Мэн	28 декабря 2005 г.
Иллинойс	2005 г. (занятость и жилье) 2006 (общественные помещения)
Гавайи	11 июля 2005 г. (жилье и общественные помещения) 5 мая 2011 г. (трудоустройство)
Вашингтон	2006
Нью-Джерси	2006
Вермонт	2007
Орегон	2007
Мичиган	Кодифицировано в марте 2023 г.
Айова	2007
Колорадо	2007 г. (занятость и жилье) 2008 (общественные помещения)
Nevada	2011
Connecticut	October 1, 2011
Massachusetts	2012 (employment and housing) 2016 (public accommodations)
Delaware	2013
Maryland	2014
Utah	2015
New York	January 20, 2016
New Hampshire	July 8, 2018
Virginia	July 1, 2020

Cases

In 2000, a court ruling in Connecticut determined that conventional sex discrimination laws protected transgender persons. However, in 2011, to clarify and codify this ruling, a separate law was passed defining legal anti-discrimination protections on the basis of gender identity.

On October 16, 1976, the Court rejected plaintiff's appeal in sex discrimination case involving termination from teaching job after sex reassignment surgery from a New Jersey school system.

Carroll v. Talman Fed. Savs. & Loan Association, 604 F.2d 1028, 1032 (7th Cir.) 1979, held that dress codes are permissible. "So long as [dress codes] and some justification in commonly accepted social norms and are reasonably related to the employer's business needs, such regulations are not necessarily violations of Title VII even though the standards prescribed differ somewhat for men and women."

In Ulane v. Eastern Airlines Inc. 742 F.2d 1081 (7th Cir. 1984) Karen Ulane, a pilot who was assigned male at birth, underwent sex reassignment surgery to attain typically female characteristics. The Seventh Circuit denied Title VII sex discrimination protection by narrowly interpreting "sex" discrimination as discrimination "against women" [and denying Ulane's womanhood].

The case of Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins 490 U.S. 228 (1989), expanded the protection of Title VII by prohibiting gender discrimination, which includes sex stereotyping. In that case, a woman who was discriminated against by her employer for being too "masculine" was granted Title VII relief.

Oncale v. Sundowner Offshore Services, Inc. 523 U.S. 75 (1998), found that same-sex sexual harassment is actionable under Title VII.

A gender stereotype is an assumption about how a person should dress which could encompass a significant range of transgender behavior. This potentially significant change in the law was not tested until Smith v. City of Salem 378 F.3d 566, 568 (6th Cir. 2004). Smith, a trans woman, had been employed as a lieutenant in the fire department without incident for seven years. After doctors diagnosed Smith with Gender Identity Disorder ("GID"), she began to experience harassment and retaliation following complaint. She filed Title VII claims of sex discrimination and retaliation, equal protection and due process claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, and state law claims of invasion of privacy and civil conspiracy. On appeal, the Price Waterhouse precedent was applied at p. 574: "[i]t follows that employers who discriminate against men because they do wear dresses and makeup, or otherwise act femininely, are also engaging in sex discrimination, because the discrimination would not occur but for the victim's sex." Chow (2005 at p214) comments that the Sixth Circuit's holding and reasoning represents a significant victory for transgender people. By reiterating that discrimination based on both sex and gender expression is forbidden under Title VII, the court steers transgender jurisprudence in a more expansive direction. But dress codes, which frequently have separate rules based solely on gender, continue. Carroll v. Talman Fed. Savs. & Loan Association, 604 F.2d 1028, 1032 (7th Cir.) 1979, has not been overruled.

Harrah's implemented a policy named "Personal Best", in which it dictated a general dress code for its male and female employees. Females were required to wear makeup, and there were similar rules for males. One female employee, Darlene Jesperson, objected and sued under Title VII. In Jespersen v. Harrah's Operating Co., No. 03-15045 (9th Cir. April 14, 2006), plaintiff conceded that dress codes could be legitimate but that certain aspects could nevertheless be demeaning; plaintiff also cited Price Waterhouse. The Ninth Circuit disagreed, upholding the practice of business-related gender-specific dress codes. When such a dress code is in force, an employee amid transition could find it impossible to obey the rules.

In Glenn v. Brumby, the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals held that the Equal Protection Clause prevented the state of Georgia from discriminating against an employee for being transgender.

Drag shows

On March 2, 2023, Tennessee governor Bill Lee signed the Adult Entertainment Act, which prohibits drag performances for children. This bill sparked outrage from the LGBT community. On June 3, 2023, a federal judge ruled that the law is unconstitutional. On July 18, 2024, a three judge panel on the Sixth Circuit reinstated the law by ruling that the plaintiffs had lacked the standing to sue. The ruling did not address whether the law was constitutional.

The states of Florida, Montana, and Texas have also passed laws banning public drag performances. However, all three of these drag bans were blocked by courts from taking effect.

Education

Main article: Gender identity under Title IX

See also: Anti-LGBT curriculum laws in the United States

  State law prohibits LGBT inclusive instruction in the classroom as of May 2023

  State law prohibits LGBT inclusive instruction in the classroom up to a certain age and requires parental notification past that age.

  State law requires parental notification of LGBT inclusive instruction and allows parents to opt their children out.

  State law explicitly requires LGBT inclusion in state curricular standards.

The Obama administration took the position that Title IX's prohibition on discrimination on the basis of "sex" encompasses discrimination on the basis of gender identity and gender expression. In 2016, the Fourth Circuit became the first Court of Appeals to agree with the administration on the scope of Title IX as applied to transgender students, in the case of Virginia high school student Gavin Grimm (G.G. v. Gloucester County School Board). The validity of the executive's position is being tested further in the federal courts. In 2017 the ACLU, representing Grimm, stated that they had stopped Grimm's "request for an immediate halt to the Gloucester County School Board's policy prohibiting him and other transgender students from using the common restrooms at school" but were "moving forward with his claim for damages and his demand to end the anti-trans policy permanently." Judge Allen of the U.S. District Court of the Eastern District of Virginia, in May 2018, ruled that Grimm's discrimination claim was valid based upon Title IX and the U.S. Constitution's equal protection clause.

In 2014, Maryland Senate passed a bill that "bans discrimination based on sexual orientation and sexual identity but includes an exemption for religious organizations, private clubs and educational institutions.

According to the Vera Institute in 2016, "transgender youth are more likely to leave school due to harassment, physical assault, and sexual violence".

In 2016, guidance was issued by the Departments of Justice and Education stating that schools which receive federal money must treat a student's gender identity as their sex (for example, in regard to bathrooms). However, this policy was revoked in 2017.

In 2022, the state of Florida enacted the Parental Rights in Education Act, commonly known as the "Don't Say Gay Bill", banning any "classroom discussion about sexual orientation or gender identity" by school personnel or third parties, up through third grade. For older students, any discussion of such must be "age appropriate or developmentally appropriate", with the goal to, according to the text of the legislation, "reinforce the fundamental right of parents to make decisions regarding the upbringing and control of their children". As of July 2022, five more states have enacted similar laws. In early 2023, a national proposal was introduced as HR 5, "The Parents Bill of Rights Act."

In July 2022, the Florida Department of Education issued a memo to all Florida schools referring to transgender non-discrimination policies regarding access to public facilities as "imposing a sexual ideology" on schools, and saying that any school that did not sufficiently discriminate against transgender students could be in an acting violation of state law.

That same month, Texas along with more than 20 other states sued the U.S. Department of Agriculture to overturn its policy requiring schools participating in federal food assistance programs to investigate allegations of discrimination due to sexual orientation or gender identity.

Parental notification

As of April 2024, at least six states — Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Idaho, Indiana and North Carolina— have laws that, if a teacher believes a child is transgender, the teacher must notify the child's parents. Additionally, Virginia asked schools to write guidance on this matter.

Local school boards

Local K-12 school boards have adopted a variety of policies regarding trans students, ranging from allowing fully equal rights and non-discrimination for trans students, to requiring trans students to submit to a criminal background check to be allowed to use the bathroom consistent with their gender identity, to implementing full bans on expressing one's self-declared gender at all, including bans on chosen pronouns and pride flags, to even bans on mentioning the very existence of trans people.

Employment

In a 2021 survey by the UCLA Williams Institute, 48.8% of trans people reported experiencing employment discrimination due to their trans status. 43.8% reported receiving verbal harassment in the workplace for being trans, and 22.4% reported being sexually harassed in the workplace in the preceding five years.

According to the Human Rights Campaign, in 2021 transgender women in the US were paid 60 cents for every dollar the average worker was paid.

A study conducted by the Center for Public Integrity in July 2022 found that in preceding month, 30% of trans adults had lost their jobs or lived with someone who had, and that in that month trans people experienced hunger at more than twice the rate that cis people did.According to Ross Wicks, director of LGBTQ+ Canadian non-profit Pflag, While more than 60% of Americans favor transgender rights in education and public employment, 41% support a ban on teaching about gender identity in elementary schools.

According to the 2022 US Transgender Survey, 18% of all trans adults face unemployment, while the number living below the poverty line is 34%.

Public factors

Public support for transgender people has shifted in recent years.

According to the Public Religion Research Institute, support for mandating that trans people use the bathroom corresponding to their gender assigned at birth has risen among all religious groups, with white protestant evangelicals being the highest change, going from 41% in support to 72% in support between 2017 and 2021. 41% of total Americans hold this stance, with 31% disagreeing, and 28% not holding a position on the issue.

60% of American adults reported in the summer of 2022 that they opposed allowing nonbinary marker options on government documents, while 58% reported supporting mandating that trans athletes compete on teams matching their gender assigned at birth.

On the other hand, most Americans have more positive attitudes regarding transgender individuals in the workplace. Although American adults overreport their support in surveys, over two-thirds of them would be comfortable with a transgender manager and support employment nondiscrimination protection for transgender people, even after correcting for this overreporting. However, stated labor market support for transgender people is lower than support for gay, lesbian, and bisexual people.

Social media

In 2019, a report analyzing 10 million US and UK social media posts over three and a half years found that of that 10 million social media posts, 15% (1.5 million) expressed transphobic sentiment.

A study conducted by Media Matters between February 2019 and February 2020 found that the top five most-interacted sources on Facebook regarding transgender people were LifeSite News, the Daily Caller, the Daily Wire, Western Journal, and the Alliance Defending Freedom, with right wing sources on trans issues receiving 43.33 million interactions, compared to left wing sources receiving only 2.56 million.

In the wake of the Colorado Springs nightclub shooting, in which a man walked into an LGBTQ nightclub and opened fire, Twitter unbanned the accounts of several major anti-trans figures that had previously been suspended for breaking twitter policies regarding the targeting of LGBTQ people, while reformatting its hateful conduct policy so that a provision that banned "targeted misgendering or deadnaming of transgender individuals" was "now effectively dead", according to Vanity Fair.

Politicians

In February 2022, United States Senate candidate J. D. Vance from Ohio falsely attributed the then looming Russian invasion of Ukraine to transgender rights, saying "We didn't serve in the Marine Corps to go and fight Vladimir Putin because he didn't believe in transgender rights"

In May 2022, United States Representative Paul Gosar issued a statement via Twitter falsely claiming that the mass shooter in the Uvalde school shooting which killed 19 elementary school children, was a "transsexual leftist illegal alien".

A joint report by the Human Rights Campaign and the Center for Countering Digital Hate found that the Twitter accounts of Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene and Representative Lauren Boebert were among the top three sources in the United States for the promotion and propagation of the grooming conspiracy theory. In response, Lauren Boebert stated via Twitter "My tweets about groomers are only third? Guess that means I have to tweet about these sick, demented groomers even more".

In September 2022, Senator Ted Cruz of Texas cast attention on a gender affirming healthcare doctor at University of Wisconsin, saying "She does this to children. Sterilizes & mutilates them". Providing gender-affirming healthcare to trans minors is considered best practice by the American Medical Association, American Psychiatric Association, the Endocrine Society, American Academy of Pediatrics, and the World Professional Association for Transgender Health.

That same month, Republican Representative Bob Good from Virginia stated his belief that the high suicide rates among trans youth, widely believed to be due to systemic discrimination and lack of access to proper healthcare, were in fact due to sexual "grooming" into being transgender. Senate Candidate Herschel Walker from Georgia was also reported as saying that trans children would not be able to get into heaven.

Media involvement

In April 2022, the left-leaning media watchdog Media Matters published a study stating that within a three week period spanning from March 17 to April 6, Fox News ran 170 segments on trans people, throughout which "the network spread dangerous lies about the trans community and repeatedly invoked the long-debunked myth that trans people pose a threat to minors and seek to groom them".

The New York Times

In June 2022, the New York Times published a front page article titled "The Battle Over Gender Therapy", which reportedly "uncritically platformed gender-critical group Genspect, and the New York Times Magazine's article said the group has held 'web-based seminars that are critical of social and medical transition'", and that "Some parents, who are part of Genspect, told [the author] that they believed the 'rise in trans-identified teenagers was the result of a 'gender cult' – a mass craze'". The Texas Observer described the article as elevating "a handful of outliers and their discredited theories about trans people to prominence they do not enjoy among the medical community" and that "the article echoes right-wing fear-mongering about whether trans kids should be allowed to transition and even suggests their existence could be dangerous to other young people", noting that "the state of Texas is using it as evidence in an ongoing attempt to investigate trans-supportive healthcare as 'child abuse'".

In July 2022, the New York Times published an op-ed falsely attributing the overturning of Roe v. Wade by six conservative Supreme Court justices, to the existence of trans women causing the "erasure" of "women as a biological category". This article was widely circulated, with Representative Rashida Tlaib issuing a statement in response saying that "During escalating assaults on trans people & trans rights nationwide, the New York Times is featuring writers debating whether trans people should even exist and scapegoating this already-marginalized community."

Since then, the New York Times has published several more pieces arguing in favor of restricting access to gender affirming healthcare for trans people, many of which have been widely criticized as "misinformation" by medical experts.

In February 2023, more than 200 NYT contributors signed an open letter expressing "serious concerns about editorial bias in the newspaper's reporting on transgender, non⁠-⁠binary, and gender nonconforming people". The letter characterized the NYT's reporting as using "an eerily familiar mix of pseudoscience and euphemistic, charged language", and raised concerns regarding the NYT's employment practices regarding trans contributors.

Grooming conspiracy theory

Main article: LGBT grooming conspiracy theory

Popularization of the grooming conspiracy theory in the United States has been linked to Christopher Rufo, who tweeted in August 2021 about "winning the language war," and James A. Lindsay. Following the Wi Spa controversy in July 2021, Julia Serano noted that there a rise in false accusations of grooming directed towards transgender people, saying that it appeared as if there was a movement to "lay the foundation for just smearing all trans people as child sexual predators." Libs of TikTok (LoTT) also helped popularize the term 'groomer' as a pejorative for LGBT people, supporters of LGBT youth, and those who teach about sexuality. In November 2021 LoTT claimed that the Trevor Project was a "grooming organization" and later in the year claimed that Chasten Buttigieg was "grooming kids."

On February 24, The Heritage Foundation, a conservative Washington, D.C.-based think tank, tweeted that the bill "protects young children from sexual grooming". On March 4, Christina Pushaw, press secretary for Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, referred to the bill as "an anti-grooming bill" and stated via twitter that anyone against it was "probably a groomer".

Since then, numerous right wing pundits began describing the behavior of parents and teachers who want to allow children to express their transgender identity as grooming, and the term "groomer" has become widely used by conservative media and politicians to imply that the LGBTQ community and their allies are pedophiles or pedophile-enablers. Slate magazine later described the word "grooming" as "the buzzword of the season".

In April 2022, the left-leaning media watchdog Media Matters published a study stating that within a three week period spanning from March 17 to April 6, Fox News ran 170 segments on trans people, throughout which "the network spread dangerous lies about the trans community and repeatedly invoked the long-debunked myth that trans people pose a threat to minors and seek to groom them".

The Canadian Anti-Hate Network has stated that trans people are "slandered the same way homosexual men were slandered in the 70s, and for the same reason: to deny them safety and equal rights," adding that "the far-right and their fellow travelers in the so-called Gender Critical or Trans-Exclusionary Radical Feminist movements use the exact same tropes in a bid to deny equal rights to trans persons." Florence Ashley of the University of Toronto has stated that the focus of the conspiracy on LGBT+ people and on trans people in particular is used to radicalize public opinion towards the far-right, comparing it to the White genocide conspiracy theory.

According to a joint report in August 2022 by the American Human Rights Campaign, and the British Center for Countering Digital Hate found that the 500 most influential hateful "grooming" tweets were seen 72 million times, and that "grooming" tweets from just ten influential sources were seen 48 million times. It also found that Meta, formerly known as Facebook, had accepted up to $24,987 for ads pushing the grooming conspiracy theory, which had been served to users over 2.1 million times, and that Twitter - despite saying groomer slurs were a violation of its hate speech policy - failed to act on 99% of tweets reported for such.

Restroom access

See also: Bathroom bill

States and counties in the United States which have enacted legislation on restrooms, locker rooms, and other sex-segregated public accommodations, in regard to their access from those who are transgender, or have gender dysphoria as of March 2023:

---

  State, city, or county mandates single-user unisex restrooms in all public buildings

  State explicitly prohibits discrimination in restrooms on the basis of gender identity

  State legislation or school guidelines currently allow students to use restrooms that correspond with gender identity

---

  State legislation or school guidelines currently prohibit students from using restrooms that differ from biological sex

  Currently considering state legislation or school guidelines that would prohibit students from using restrooms that differ from biological sex

---

  State indecent exposure law may be construed to criminalize trans people from undressing in locker rooms or using restrooms that do not match their biological sex

  Currently considering bills that may criminalize trans people from undressing in locker rooms or using restrooms that do not match their biological sex

An area of legal concern for transgender people is access to restrooms which are segregated by gender. Transgender people have, in the past, been asked for legal identification while entering or using a gendered restroom. Recent legislation has moved in contradictory directions. On one hand, non-discrimination laws have included restrooms as public accommodations, indicating a right to use gendered facilities which conform with a person's gender identity. On the other, some efforts have been made to insist that individuals use restrooms that match their biological sex, regardless of an individual's gender identity or expression.

Comprehensive legislation

Numerous jurisdictions and states have passed or considered so-called "bathroom bills" which restrict the use of bathrooms by transgender people, forcing them to choose facilities in accordance with their biological sex. As of May 2024, Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Mississippi, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Tennessee and Utah have such laws.

On March 23, 2016, North Carolina passed a comprehensive bathroom restriction bill (the Public Facilities Privacy & Security Act, also known as "HB2"), overriding a prior municipal Charlotte non-discrimination ordinance on the same subject. It was quickly signed into law by Gov. Pat McCrory, but on March 30, 2017, following national controversy, the part of the law related to bathrooms was repealed. According to the ACLU, the partial repeal still allowed discrimination against transgender persons.

In April 2016, objecting to the "bathroom predator myth", a coalition of over 200 U.S. organizations for sexual assault and domestic violence survivors noted that, while "over 200 municipalities and 18 states" had legal protections for transgender people, none of these places had tied an increase in sexual violence to these nondiscrimination laws.

In September 2016, California governor Jerry Brown signed a bill requiring all single-occupancy bathrooms to be gender-neutral, effective since March 1, 2017. California is the first U.S. state to adopt such legislation. Vermont, New Mexico and Illinois have since followed suit in 2019.

On May 2, 2019, Tennessee governor Bill Lee signed into law legislation defining a trans person using the bathroom corresponding with their gender identity as "indecent exposure." The Tennessee Equality Project had complained about the bill's original language, and although that language was altered before it became law, the organization still believed the bill was harmful to trans people.

On April 8, 2022, Alabama Governor Ivey signed a bathroom bill applying to public schools. As of March 2024, she is likely to sign a similar bill applying to universities.

On May 3, 2023, the Florida legislature passed the "Safety in Private Spaces Act", which the governor was expected to sign, making it a second-degree misdemeanor to use a bathroom other than that which is designated for people of one's sex assigned at birth. An earlier attempt in 2015 had failed.

Indecent exposure charges for restroom use

In September 2021, following extensive right wing protests, a Los Angeles trans woman was charged by the LAPD with felony indecent exposure after she was recorded using the women's changing room at a local nude spa. The trans woman had two previous convictions for indecent exposure and a conviction for failing to register as a sex offender. The nude spa in question had an explicitly trans-inclusive policy, and mandated nudity in gender segregated areas.

In February 2023, another trans woman was charged with indecent exposure for using the changing room at the YWCA in Xenia, Ohio, despite the facility's policy also being one of support.

Schools

In Doe v. Regional School Unit, the Maine Supreme Court held that a transgender girl had a right to use the women's bathroom at school because her psychological well-being and educational success depended on her transition. The school, in denying her access, had "treated [her] differently from other students solely because of her status as a transgender girl." The court determined that this was a form of discrimination.

In Mathis v. Fountain-Fort Carson School District 8 (2013), Colorado's Division of Civil Rights found that denying a transgender girl access to the women's restroom at school was discrimination. They reasoned, "By not permitting the [student] to use the restroom with which she identifies, as non-transgender students are permitted to do, the [school] treated the [student] less favorably than other students seeking the same service." Furthermore, the court rejected the school's defense—that the discriminatory policy was implemented to protect the transgender student from harassment—and observed that transgender students are in fact safest when a school does not single them out as different. Based on this finding, it is no longer acceptable to institute different kinds of bathroom rules for transgender and cisgender people.

In May 2016, guidance was issued by the United States Department of Justice and the United States Department of Education stating that schools which receive federal money must treat a student's gender identity as their sex (for example, in regard to bathrooms). However, this policy was revoked in 2017.

Main article: G.G. v. Gloucester County School Board

In October 2016, the Court agreed to take on the case of whether a transgender boy, Gavin Grimm, could use the boys' bathroom in his Virginia high school. Grimm was assigned female at birth but is a transgender male. For a while, he was permitted access to the boys' bathroom but was later denied access after a new policy was adopted by the local school board. The ACLU took on the case, stating that girls objected when he tried to use the girls' bathroom in accordance with the new policy and that he was humiliated when the school directed him to use a private bathroom, unlike other boys. After challenging the policy, he won his case in the Court of Appeals in 2015 in a tie vote. This marked the first ruling by an appeals court to find that transgender students are protected under federal laws that ban sex-based discrimination. However, later in 2016 the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to put that ruling on hold. Then in 2017 the U.S. Supreme Court vacated the decision of the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals and refused to hear the case. Later in 2017, it was announced that the 4th Circuit would send the case back to the district court for the judge to determine whether the case was moot because Grimm graduated. The District Court found the case was not moot, and ruled in favor of Grimm, which was later upheld by the Fourth Circuit on appeal in August 2020, using the Supreme Court's recent decision in Bostock v. Clayton County as a basis for their decision.

A similar case had occurred in the public schools of Dallas, Oregon, which had allowed transgender students to use the restrooms and locker rooms of the school based on their gender identity on the basis of the 2016 federal policy. Parents of other students had sued to have the policy overturned, but the policy was upheld at both the United States District Court for the District of Oregon and the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. The Supreme Court denied to hear the challenge to the Ninth Circuit in November 2020, leaving that decision in place.

Workplace

Rights to restrooms that match one's gender identity have also been recognized in the workplace and are actively being asserted in public accommodations. In Iowa, for example, discrimination in public accommodations on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity has been prohibited by law since 2007 through the Iowa Civil Rights Act.

In Cruzan v. Special School District #1, decided in 2002, a Minnesota federal appeals court ruled that it is not the job of the transgender person to accommodate the concerns of cisgender people who express discomfort with sharing a facility with a transgender person. Employers need to offer an alternative to the complaining employee in these situations, such as an individual restroom.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) chair Charlotte A. Burrows issued guidelines in 2021 stating that "employers may not deny an employee equal access to a bathroom, locker room, or shower that corresponds to the employee's gender identity."

Hate crimes legislation

US state hate crime laws as they pertain to gender identity as of June 2020

  Gender identity recognized in state hate crimes law

  No enumerated protection

Anti-Defamation League, June 2006. Retrieved May 4, 2007

Further information: Hate crime laws in the United States

Federal hate crimes legislation include limited protections for gender identity. The Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2009 criminalized "willfully causing bodily injury (or attempting to do so with fire, firearm, or other dangerous weapon)" on the basis of an "actual or perceived" identity. However, protections for hate crimes motivated on the basis of a victim's gender identity or sexual orientation is limited to "crime affect[ing] interstate or foreign commerce or occur[ring] within federal special maritime and territorial jurisdiction." This limitation only applies to gender identity and sexual orientation, and not to race, color, religion or national origin. Therefore, hate crimes which occur outside these jurisdictions are not protected by federal law.

22 states plus Washington D.C. have hate crimes legislation which includes gender identity or expression as a protected group. They are Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut, New Jersey, Delaware, Illinois, Maryland, Missouri, Minnesota, Colorado, New Mexico, Nevada, Rhode Island, Washington, Oregon, California, Hawaii, Maine, Tennessee, Puerto Rico, Utah, Virginia and New York. Twenty-seven states have hate-crimes legislation which exclude transgender people. Six states have no hate-crimes legislation at all.

Numerous municipalities have passed hate-crime legislation, some of which include transgender people. However Arkansas, North Carolina and Tennessee recently passed laws which ban municipalities from enacting such protections for sexual orientation, gender identity or expression.

Healthcare

See also: Transgender health care

See also: Transgender § Healthcare

Transgender people confront two major legal issues within the healthcare system: access to health care for gender transitioning and discrimination by health care workers.

Treatment for adults

Many Republican legislators across the country are increasingly proposing legislation that would restrict gender-affirming care for adults or make such treatments harder to access. However, no states have succeeded at outright banning gender-affirming care for adults in a way similar to what is being done with minors. Efforts to restrict adults' access to healthcare relies heavily on claims from self-described "gender-critical" organizations such as Genspect that young people should not be recognized as adults until they turn 25.

As of January 2024, seven states limit access to gender-affirming care for adults in some way without banning it, such as allowing private health plans, Medicaid, and correctional facilities to exclude all coverage for gender-affirming care, prohibiting the use of federal funds for gender-affirming care or requiring informed consent practices beyond those typically required in medical practice.

In January 2024, in a conversation about trans healthcare with several Republican legislators, Michigan State Rep. Josh Schriver asked, "If we are going to stop this for anyone under 18, why not apply it for anyone over 18? It’s harmful across the board and that’s something we need to take into consideration in terms of the endgame." Michigan State Rep. Brad Paquette and Ohio State Rep. Gary Click expressed agreement with that sentiment.

As part of his 2024 presidential campaign, Donald Trump has stated that if elected, he will sign an executive order instructing every federal agency to cease the promotion of sex or gender transition at any age as well as ask Congress to pass a bill stating that the United States will only recognize two genders as determined at birth, and has promised to crackdown on gender-affirming care for all ages. Additionally, Trump stated that he would make hospitals and health care providers that provide transitional hormones or surgery no longer qualify for federal funding, including Medicare and Medicaid funding. Trump has also stated he will push to prohibit hormonal and surgical intervention for minors in all 50 states.

These states make it easy for trans adults to sue their doctors:

Any civil action to recover damages for injury suffered as a result of a violation ofsection 2 of this Act must be commenced before the later of:(1) The date on which the person reaches age twenty-five

• Utah: In January 2023, Utah stripped liability protections from any doctor who treats a trans person under the age of 25, and allowing any trans person under 25 to retroactively "disaffirm" consent and sue the doctor for providing care they had at the time consented to.
• South Dakota: In February 2023, South Dakota passed a law stating that any civil action to recover damages for injury suffered as a result of gender-affirming care performed on a minor must be commenced before the date on which the person reaches age of 25.
• Arkansas: On March 13, 2023, Governor Sarah Huckabee Sanders signed a bill giving adults 15 years to file malpractice lawsuits for gender-affirming care they received as minors, whereas for other types of care (under preexisting law) a malpractice lawsuit must generally be filed within two years.

These states restrict treatment for trans adults (as well as younger people):

• Florida: In August 2022, the state of Florida voted to require any trans adult seeking gender affirming healthcare to receive approval from the Florida Board of Medicine at least 24 hours in advance. On May 17, 2023, DeSantis signed a law banning insurance providers from covering gender-affirming care for adults, as well as banning nurse practitioners and physicians' assistants (estimated to make up 80% of gender affirming care providers) from administering it, and banning it from being offered via telehealth. The Florida state legislature had passed the bill the previous month. In June 2024, a judge permanently blocked the law from taking effect.
• Missouri: In April 2023, the state attorney general issued an emergency order instituting a three-year waiting period of continuous documented dysphoria before qualifying for gender-affirming care, disqualifying people if they have untreated depression or anxiety, mandates a screening for autism, and mandating regular screenings for "social contagion". This has been characterized by many as a de facto ban on trans healthcare for adults, since depression and anxiety are common symptoms of gender dysphoria. A judge temporarily blocked enforcement of the order and scheduled a hearing for May 11. The attorney general withdrew this order on May 16 after the state legislature passed two bills restricting gender-affirming care for trans youth. On June 7, 2023, Governor Mike Parson signed a bill that contained a provision banning gender-affirming care for prisoners, which took effect on August 28.

Treatment for minors

See also: Transgender youth

See also: Detransition § Forced detransition

US state laws that ban gender-affirming care for transgender people as of April 2024

  Law restricting access to gender-affirming care that is unenforceable due to court injunction or executive order

  Law that restricts gender-affirming care for transgender minors

  Law that restricts gender-affirming care for transgender adults as well as children

"Gender-affirming care for minors has been available in the U.S. for more than a decade and is endorsed by major medical associations, but it has increasingly come under attack in many conservative legislatures." Efforts to prohibit gender-affirming care for minors had begun several years earlier, but did not receive much attention from state legislatures until more recently. The conservative organization Do No Harm was influential in developing model legislation that appeared starting in 2022 in Arkansas, Florida, Iowa, Mississippi, Montana, New Hampshire, and West Virginia legislatures.

In February 2024, the American Psychological Association approved a policy statement supporting unobstructed access to health care and evidence-based clinical care for transgender, gender-diverse, and nonbinary children, adolescents, and adults, as well as opposing state bans and policies intended to limit access to such care.

As of July 2024, 26 states had enacted some form of ban on gender-affirming care for minors, 19 of which were enacted in 2023. However, 16 of these bans are being challenged in court as of January 2024. Furthermore, only 17 of the 25 states have complete bans which are fully in effect. Six states have only partial bans and three are currently blocked from taking effect. While some states have banned all forms of medical transition, others such as Arizona, Nebraska, New Hampshire and Georgia have banned only specific types such as hormone therapy or surgery. Six states have exceptions which allow minors who were already receiving gender affirming care prior to the ban to continue their treatments. Currently, all 26 states make exceptions for puberty blockers, hormones and surgery for cisgender and intersex children. Only one state, West Virginia, makes exceptions in cases of "severe dysphoria". There is also currently only one state, Missouri, that has a ban which is set to expire after a certain period of time. Nearly all states with restrictions include specific provisions with penalties for providers and 4 states include provisions directed at parents or guardians. An additional 4 states include laws/policies that impact school officials such as teachers and counselors, among others.

At the same time, many Democrat-controlled states have gone in the opposite direction and enacted laws protecting access to gender affirming care for minors and adults. These laws, often called "shield" laws, often explicitly combine protections for gender-affirming care and abortion and cover a variety of protections including protecting both providers and patients from being punished, mandating insurance providers to cover the procedures and acting as "sanctuary states" that protect patients traveling to the state from other states that have banned such treatments among other things. As of June 2024, 16 states and the District of Columbia have enacted "shield" laws.

Of the approximately 1.6 million Americans who are transgender, about 300,000 are under the age of 18. As of October 2023, approximately 105,200 transgender youth aged 13 to 17 lived in states where gender affirming care is banned for minors. However, around 26,000 of those youth are currently still able to access care in their state due to court orders that prohibit enforcement of the laws. Conversely, around 146,700 transgender youth live in states that have passed gender-affirming care "shield" laws that support access to care by protecting doctors and parents who prescribe or seek access to medical care for youth. An analysis from KFF in late January 2024 estimated that 38% of trans youth between the ages of 13-17 in the United States lived in states with laws limiting youth access to gender-affirming care.

Bans on gender-affirming care have led some families with transgender children to flee their states.

Bans for minors

  Laws which are currently unenforceable due to a court injunction

  Laws which only partially ban gender affirming care for minors

Bans of gender-affirming healthcare for people under 18

State	Authority	Signed	Effective	Notes
Arkansas	State legislature	April 6, 2021	Permanently blocked	On April 6, 2021, the legislature—overriding Governor Asa Hutchinson's veto on a bill that banned puberty blockers, hormones, and surgery for minors and from referring them to other providers. However, courts temporarily and then permanently blocked the law.
Texas	Texas AG Ken Paxton Governor Greg Abbott	February 22, 2022 June 2, 2023	Blocked by injunction (order) September 1, 2023 (legislation)	In February 2022, the state Attorney General ordered a ban on gender-affirming care for trans youth, with criminal penalties for failing to report suspected violations. However, the order is currently blocked by injunction. In June 2023, the governor signed a law to ban this care for minors. On August 25 , 2023, a district court judge blocked the law from taking effect. In response, the Attorney General's office filed an appeal with the Texas Supreme Court, a move that automatically pauses the judge's injunction and allowed the law to go into effect on September 1, 2023, as originally planned. On June 28, 2024, the Texas Supreme Court upheld the law.
Alabama	Governor Kay Ivey	April 8, 2022	May 8, 2022	It is a felony for a medical provider to give gender-affirming healthcare to transgender people under 19 (the age of majority in Alabama). In May 2022, a federal judge ruled that the ban on surgery was enforceable. However, the ban on puberty blockers and hormones was not enforceable while the law is challenged in court. In August 2023, the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the decision, allowing the ban on puberty blockers and hormones to take effect.
Utah	Governor Spencer Cox	January 27, 2023
South Dakota	Governor Kristi Noem	February 13, 2023
Mississippi	Governor Tate Reeves	February 28, 2023
Tennessee	Governor Bill Lee	March 2, 2023
Florida	Florida Board of Medicine Governor Ron DeSantis		Permanently blocked (legislation) Blocked (state board of medicine rule)	The state board of medicine rule took effect on March 16, 2023. Additionally, on May 17, 2023, Governor DeSantis signed a ban into law, and it took effect immediately. It applies only to new patients, not those who were already receiving gender-affirming care. However, on June 6, 2023, a court temporarily blocked enforcement of both the board rule and the law. In June 2024, a judge permanently blocked the law from taking effect.
Iowa	Governor Kim Reynolds	March 22, 2023
Georgia	Governor Brian Kemp	March 23, 2023	July 1, 2023	Bans hormones and surgery while continuing to allow puberty blockers. Minors who began hormones prior to July 1, 2023 are allowed to continue treatment.
West Virginia	Governor Jim Justice	March 29, 2023		The bill makes exceptions for minors who have received parental consent and are diagnosed with "severe gender dysphoria" by two doctors. Due to this exception, experts do not expect the ban to have much of an impact.
Kentucky	State legislature	March 29, 2023	July 14, 2023	The legislature overrode Governor Andy Beshear's veto, banning gender-affirming healthcare for trans minors. Federal appeals judges allowed the ban to remain in effect during legal challenges to overturn it.
Arizona	Governor Doug Ducey	March 30, 2022	March 31, 2023	Bans gender-affirming surgery for minors, but not hormones and puberty blockers. The bill also makes some exceptions, including in the case of someone born intersex. In mid 2023, a new Governor, Katie Hobbs reversed course by signing a series of executive orders which include shield-style protections for gender-affirming care, ensuring that it remains legal in Arizona. It also bans conversion therapy, requires insurance plans to cover gender-affirming care and bars state agencies from cooperating with civil and criminal cases in states where gender-affirming health care is illegal.
Idaho	Governor Brad Little	April 4, 2023	April 15, 2024	It would also make it a felony for any medical practitioner to help a minor seek gender-affirming treatment. On December 27, 2023, a federal judge blocked the law from taking effect. On April 15, 2024, the US Supreme Court responded to an emergency request filed in February by temporarily allowing the ban to go into effect while further legal challenges to it play out in the lower courts. The ruling did not resolve the underlying legal challenges raised by the case nor did the justices rule on the larger issue of bans on gender-affirming treatment for minors. The ruling also does not apply to the two plaintiffs in the lawsuit.
Indiana	Governor Eric Holcomb	April 5, 2023	February 27, 2024	On June 16, 2023, a federal judge temporarily blocked the law from taking effect. On February 27, 2024, the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the decision allowing the ban to take effect.
North Dakota	Governor Doug Burgum	April 20, 2023		On April 20, 2023, North Dakota Governor Doug Burgum signed a law criminalizing trans health care for minors. However, the law notably makes exceptions for medication treatment for "rare circumstances with parental consent". The law also allows medication treatment for early onset puberty and minors who were already receiving gender-affirming care will still be able to receive treatment.
Montana	Governor Greg Gianforte	April 28, 2023	Blocked	Treatments such as puberty-blockers and breast-reduction surgery will still be legal for minors who are not suffering from gender dysphoria. On September 27, 2023, a Montana District Court judge prevented it from taking effect.
North Carolina	State legislature		August 17, 2023	Ban on gender-affirming care, such as hormones, puberty blockers, and surgery, for minors. The ban only applies to transgender children and still allows such treatments for intersex and cisgender children. The ban also only applies to new patients. Transgender children who started treatment prior to August 1, 2023 will be allowed to continue receiving treatment. Governor Roy Cooper vetoed the bill on July 5, 2023, but the state legislature overruled his veto on August 17, therefore making the bill law.
Missouri	Governor Mike Parson	June 7, 2023	August 28, 2023	People receiving puberty blockers or hormones before the ban went into effect may continue taking them. Otherwise, blockers and hormones are banned until 2027. Surgery is also banned.
Louisiana	State Legislature		January 1, 2024	On June 29, 2023, John Bel Edwards vetoed a ban on blockers, hormones, and surgery for minors. On July 18, the Louisiana State Legislature overrode his veto.
Oklahoma	Governor Kevin Stitt	May 1, 2023		On May 1, 2023, Governor Kevin Stitt signed a bill that makes it a felony for doctors to provide gender-transition medical care for anyone under the age of 18. In October 2023, a judge declined to stop the law from taking effect.
Nebraska	Governor Jim Pillen	October 2, 2023	October 2, 2023	On October 2, 2023, the state Department of Health and Human Services announced that Republican Governor Jim Pillen had approved emergency regulations banning gender affirming surgeries for minors. Puberty blockers and hormone treatments for minors still remain legal, however applicants must now wait seven days and undergo at least 40 hours of "clinically neutral" therapy before starting them. The new regulations went into effect immediately.
Ohio	State legislature		August 6, 2024	On January 5, 2024, Governor Mike DeWine signed an executive order banning gender-affirming surgeries for minors. Previously, on December 29, 2023, he had vetoed the Saving Adolescents from Experimentation (SAFE) Act (HB68) passed (mostly along party lines) by the Ohio Legislature on December 13 which banned gender-affirming surgeries as well as hormones and puberty blockers for minors. The bill includes exceptions for this kind of care for non-transgender youth, and it allows children who were already receiving gender-affirming care in Ohio to continue their treatment. On January 24, 2024, the legislature overrode DeWine's veto thereby making HB68 law. On April 16, 2024, a judge temporarily blocked the ban from taking effect. On August 6, 2024, a judge overturned the injunction and allowed the law to take effect immediately. The plaintiffs immediately announced an appeal.
Wyoming	Governor Mark Gordon	March 22, 2024	July 1, 2024	On March 22, 2024, Wyoming Governor Mark Gordon signed a law criminalizing trans health care for minors.
South Carolina	Governor Henry McMaster	May 21, 2024	May 21, 2024	On May 21, 2024, South Carolina Governor Henry McMaster signed a law banning trans health care for minors. The law, which went into effect immediately, also requires principals, teachers and other school staff members to tell parents when their children want to use a name other than their legal one, or pronouns that do not match their sex assigned at birth. It also bars adults under 26 from using Medicaid to cover the costs for trans health care. This part of the bill is in direct opposition to a 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruling from the month prior which ruled that state Medicaid bans on gender-affirming care in the 4th Circuit, which includes South Carolina, are unconstitutional.
New Hampshire	Governor Chris Sununu	July 19, 2024	January 1, 2025	On July 19, 2024, New Hampshire Governor Chris Sununu signed a law banning gender-affirming genital surgeries for minors. However, puberty blockers, hormones and non-genital surgeries such as mastectomies remain legal for trans youth.

Protections for minors

"Shield" laws protecting access to gender-affirming healthcare for people under 18

State	Authority	Signed	Effective	Notes
Connecticut	Governor Ned Lamont	May 5, 2022	May 5, 2022	On May 5, 2022, Governor Ned Lamont signed House Bill 5414, a shield law that designates Connecticut as a "safe harbor" which protects people who provide abortions and gender affirming care in the state, as well as legal protections for people seeking abortions and gender-affirming health care from out-of-state.
Massachusetts	Governor Charlie Baker	July 29, 2022	July 29, 2022	On July 29, 2022, Governor Charlie Baker signed a shield law which protects access to abortion and gender-affirming health care in the state.
California	Governor Gavin Newsom	September 30, 2022	January 1, 2023	On September 30, 2022, Governor Gavin Newsom signed SB 107, a shield law which designates California as a "sanctuary state" for trans youth and their families who are fleeing from other states that have banned the practice.
District of Columbia	Mayor Muriel Bowser	November 21, 2022	November 21, 2022	On November 21, 2022, Mayor Muriel Bowser signed into law D.C. ACT 24-646, the Human Rights Sanctuary Amendment Act of 2022, which protects the right to bodily autonomy and of those seeking care for abortion, contraception, sexual conduct, intimate relationships, and gender affirmation.
Illinois	Governor JB Pritzker	January 13, 2023	January 13, 2023	On January 13, 2023, Governor JB Pritzker signed into law HB4664, a reproductive rights and gender affirming care omnibus bill that protects health care providers and their patients from legal attacks by neighboring states and expands reproductive and gender affirming health care access and options across the state. The bill takes historic action to protect Illinois providers and their patients, thousands of whom have traveled to Illinois to access essential care now banned in their home states.
New Mexico	Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham	March 16, 2023	March 16, 2023	On March 16, 2023, Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham signed into law House Bill 7, the Reproductive and Gender-Affirming Health Care Act, which prohibits public bodies, including local municipalities, from denying, restricting, or discriminating against an individual's right to use or refuse reproductive health care or health care related to gender.
Vermont	Governor Phil Scott	March 29, 2023	September 2023	On March 29, 2023, Governor Phil Scott signed into law House Bill 89 and Senate Bill 37, which establish a slate of protections for both providers and seekers of gender affirming health care, as well as those seeking or administering abortions.
New Jersey	Governor Phil Murphy	April 4, 2023	April 4, 2023	On April 4, 2023, Governor Phil Murphy signed Executive Order No. 326 establishing New Jersey as a safe haven for gender-affirming health care by directing all state departments and agencies to protect all persons, including health care professionals and patients, against potential repercussions resulting from providing, receiving, assisting in providing or receiving, seeking, or traveling to New Jersey to obtain gender-affirming health care services.
Colorado	Governor Jared Polis	April 14, 2023	April 14, 2023	On April 14, 2023, Governor Jared Polis signed into law a trio of health care bills enshrining access to abortion and gender-affirming procedures and medications in Colorado. These bills ensure people in surrounding states and beyond can go to Colorado to have an abortion, begin puberty blockers or receive gender-affirming surgery without fear of prosecution.
Minnesota	Governor Tim Walz	April 27, 2023	April 27, 2023	On April 27, 2023, Governor Tim Walz signed a shield law protecting minors fleeing from other states to receive gender-affirming care. It also amends child custody and child welfare provisions related to out-of-state laws interfering in the use of gender-affirming health care; amending provisions related to warrants, arrests, and extraditions related to out-of-state laws on gender-affirming health care. It also rules that a court order for the removal of a child issued in another state because the child's parent or guardian assisted the child in receiving gender-affirming care in this state must not be enforced in this state. In addition, it rules that a law of another state that authorizes a state agency to remove a child from the child's parent or guardian because the parent or guardian allowed the child to receive gender-affirming health care is against the public policy of this state and must not be enforced or applied in a case pending in a court in this state.
Washington	Governor Jay Inslee	May 9, 2023	May 9, 2023	On May 9, 2023, Governor Jay Inslee signed a shield law designating Washington as a "sanctuary state" for trans youth.
Maryland	Governor Wes Moore	June 6, 2023	June 6, 2023	On June 6, 2023, Governor Wes Moore signed an executive order to protect gender affirming health care in Maryland. The order will protect those seeking, receiving, or providing gender affirming care in Maryland from attempts at legal punishment by other states.
New York	Governor Kathy Hochul	June 26, 2023	June 26, 2023	On June 26, 2023, Governor Kathy Hochul signed a shield law designating New York as a "sanctuary state" for trans youth. This law protects access to transition-related medical care for transgender minors and bars state courts from enforcing the laws of other states that might authorize a child to be taken away if the parents provide gender-affirming medical care, including puberty blockers and hormone therapy. It also prohibits New York courts from considering transition-related care for minors as child abuse and bars state and local authorities from cooperating with out-of-state agencies regarding the provision of lawful gender-affirming care in New York.
Arizona	Governor Katie Hobbs	June 28, 2023	June 28, 2023	On March 30, 2022, Governor Doug Ducey signed a bill banning gender-affirming surgery for minors, but not hormones and puberty blockers. The bill also makes some exceptions, including in the case of someone born intersex. On June 28, 2023, a new Governor, Katie Hobbs reversed course by signing a series of executive orders which include shield-style protections for gender-affirming care, ensuring that it remains legal in Arizona. It also bans conversion therapy, requires insurance plans to cover gender-affirming care and bars state agencies from cooperating with civil and criminal cases in states where gender-affirming health care is illegal.
Oregon	Governor Tina Kotek	July 13, 2023	July 13, 2023	On May 9, 2023, Governor Tina Kotek signed a law protecting access to abortion and gender affirming care for trans youth. Minors between the ages of 15 and 17 can receive gender affirming care without parental permission, whereas youth ages 14 and under must have parental permission.
Maine	Governor Janet Mills	April 23, 2024	April 23, 2024	On April 23, 2024, Governor Janet Mills signed a shield law designating Maine as a "sanctuary state" for gender-affirming care and abortion providers and makes access to such treatments "legal rights" in Maine. It states that criminal and civil actions against providers and patients are not enforceable if the access to that care occurred in Maine. Additionally, the bill prevents cooperation with out-of-state arrest warrants for gender-affirming care and abortion that happen within the state. It also protects doctors who provide gender-affirming care and abortion from actions by medical boards, malpractice insurance, and other regulating entities that seek to economically harm them or dissuade them from providing care. The bill also explicitly enshrines WPATH's Standards of Care into state law for the coverage of transgender healthcare.
Rhode Island	Governor Daniel McKee	June 25, 2024	June 25, 2024	On June 25, 2024, Governor Daniel McKee signed a shield law designating Rhode Island as a "sanctuary state" for gender-affirming care and abortion providers and makes access to such treatments "legal rights" in Rhode Island. The bill also protects providers from being sued for providing care.

Related studies

In one 2016 study, the effect of puberty blockers was shown to be fully reversible. Earlier studies (e.g., these in 2012 and 2015) indicated ongoing long-term research into potential effects on the brain.

Awareness of providers

The lack of knowledge and education related to transgender health is an obstacle transgender people face. A 2011 study published in JAMA reported that medical students cover up to "only five hours" of LGBT related content. A different study done by Lambda Legal in 2010 stated that 89.4% of transgender people felt that there are not enough medical providers that are "adequately trained" for their needs. This lack of medical training makes it harder for transgender people to find suitable and proper healthcare. A 2014 report by the Department of Justice found that 50% of trans people had actually had to teach their medical providers about trans healthcare.

Discrimination

A 2014 report by the Department of Justice found that 28% of trans people reported being harassed in medical settings, 19% reported being refused care, 2% reported being physically attacked in a doctor's office, 10% reported being sexually assaulted in one, 9% had been involuntarily committed, and 3% subjected to unwanted medical procedures. The report further found that it was not uncommon for trans people to be forced by psychiatric professionals to provide sexual favors in exchange for being allowed continued access to gender affirming medical care.

Transgender people also sometimes experience discrimination by healthcare professionals, who have refused to treat them for conditions both related and unrelated to their gender identity. A 2017 report by the Center for American Progress found 29 percent of transgender people reporting they were denied care by a medical provider in the preceding year due to their gender identity or sexual orientation. The same study found that 21 percent of trans people reported medical providers used abusive or harsh language when they sought care.

The Affordable Care Act (ACA) of 2010, specifically Section 1557, prohibits sex discrimination in federally funded health care facilities, and in 2012 the federal Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) clarified that this includes discrimination based on transgender status. The government's final rule in 2016 determined that the ACA forbid discrimination based on gender identity. The ACA also forbids insurance providers from refusing to cover a person based on a pre-existing condition, including being transgender. However, a federal judge in Texas in 2016 issued a nationwide injunction stopping the ACA's transgender antidiscrimination protections from taking effect, and in 2019 that same court issued a final ruling that was binding on HHS. On June 12, 2020, the Trump administration issued a new rule stating that sexual orientation and gender identity were not covered under the anti-discrimination protections of the Affordable Care Act. This rule was in effect for nearly a year until it was reversed by the Biden administration, restoring the Obama-era policy.

Complaints sent to HHS during the Trump administration indicated that medical providers were still frequently denying care to transgender people on the basis of their gender identity.

Some jurisdictions have their own laws prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sex, gender identity or gender expression in public accommodations, as well as under medical malpractice and misconduct law.

In 2020, the Supreme Court ruled in Bostock v. Clayton County that discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity is necessarily also discrimination "because of sex" as prohibited by Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and thus that Title VII protects employees against such discrimination.

A 2022 study on the allocation of ventilators during the pandemic found that respondents across the entire political spectrum were, when presented with the choice between allocating a ventillator to a cisgender man or a transgender person, on average less likely to allocate it to the trans person than to the cis man. In particular, respondents with conservative political leanings, when given a choice between allocating a ventilator to a cis man or a trans woman, were 14.3% less likely to allocate it to the trans woman, and when given a choice between allocating a ventilator to a cis man or a trans man, were 18.6% less likely to allocate it to the trans man.

Republican amendments to funding bills could defund trans healthcare, affecting hundreds of thousands of trans adults and children by restricting access to essential medical treatments like hormone therapy and surgeries.

Catholic hospitals

1 in 6 patients in the United States are treated in a Catholic facility. In March 2023, the United States Catholic Bishops issued guidelines for Catholic hospitals, entitled "Moral Limits to the Technological Manipulation of the Human Body", which banned the provision of gender affirming healthcare by such hospitals entirely.

Trans Broken Arm Syndrome

A common form of discrimination in healthcare settings is known as "trans broken arm syndrome", in which a doctor mistakenly assumes that a trans person's medical ailments stem from their trans status or gender-affirming care and consequently treats their problem incorrectly or denies them care entirely. Trans patients often hide their trans status when visiting a doctor if their problem, such as a broken arm, isn't related to their trans status. This is especially common in rural or more conservative areas.

A 2022 survey from the Center for American Progress revealed that 19 percent of trans individuals had experienced this form of discrimination in the past year.

Medical privacy

Transgender people have the right to medical privacy. According to the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA), medical providers and insurance companies are prohibited from disclosing any personal medical information including a person's transgender status. HIPAA also allows transgender people to access and receive a copy of their medical records from health care facilities.

Insurance coverage

US Medicaid coverage of health care related to gender transition for transgender people by state as of August 2023

  State with no explicit policy on Medicaid coverage of health care related to gender transition for transgender people

  State Medicaid policy explicitly includes health care coverage related to gender transition for transgender people

  State Medicaid policy explicitly excludes coverage of health care related to gender transition for transgender people

Map of states by laws protecting transgender rights in private insurance as of July 2020

  State with no protections for transgender people in insurance coverage

  State prohibits discrimination against transgender people in health insurance coverage and prohibits transgender exclusions

  State prohibits transgender exclusions in health insurance

It can be difficult for transgender people to find insurance coverage for their medical needs.

Even though there is medical consensus that hormone therapy and sex reassignment surgery (SRS) are medically necessary for many transgender people, the kinds of health care associated with gender transition are sometimes misunderstood as cosmetic, experimental or simply unnecessary. This has led to public and private insurance companies denying coverage for such treatment. Courts have repeatedly ruled that these treatments may be medically necessary and have recognized gender dysphoria as a legitimate medical condition constituting a "serious medical need".

The ban on Medicare coverage for gender reassignment surgery was repealed by the US Department of Health and Human Services in 2014. Insurance companies, however, still hold the authority to decide whether the procedures are a medical necessity. Thus, insurance companies can decide whether they will provide Medicare coverage for the surgeries.

Under federal tax laws, the Internal Revenue Code, section 213, defines the purpose of "medical care" as "for the diagnosis, cure, mitigation, treatment, or prevention of disease, or for the purpose of affecting any structure or function of the body." Only cosmetic surgeries promoting the physical or mental health of an individual can qualify for medical deductions. Transgender people have used the diagnosis of gender dysphoria to qualify for deductible health care.

The idea that transition-related care is cosmetic or experimental has been ruled as discriminatory and out of touch with current medical thinking. The AMA and WPATH have specifically rejected these arguments, and courts have affirmed their conclusion. In a case brought by Gay and Lesbian Advocates and Defenders (GLAD), O'Donnabhain v. Commissioner, for instance, the Internal Revenue Service lost its claim that such treatments were cosmetic and experimental when a transgender woman deducted her SRS procedures as a medical expense. Courts have also found that psychotherapy alone is insufficient treatment for gender dysphoria, and that for some people, SRS may be the only effective treatment.

In April 2024, The Biden administration announced expansive new protections for gay and transgender medical patients, prohibiting federally funded health providers and insurers from discriminating on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity. The new rules overturn Trump-era restrictions, but preserve religious exemptions. In June 2024, the Attorney Generals in fifteen Republican-led states sued the Biden administration over the new rules. On July 3, 2024 a federal judge temporarily blocked enforcement of the new rule.

State Medicaid Coverage

In June 2022, the Florida Agency for Healthcare Administration, the agency which is responsible for overseeing the state's Medicaid service, released a report which stated that transgender hormone therapy is "experimental and investigational".

The report was quickly rebuffed by the wider scientific community, with experts from Yale in July publishing an analysis in which they stated that the report ignored accepted scientific studies and consensus regarding gender dysphoria, had its writers chosen from those with ties to anti-LGBTQ groups specifically for their bias, cited sources with no scientific merit - including a student blog post and a letter to the editor, and that if the state used the same standard it used in the report to evaluate other treatments, it would no longer allow Medicaid to pay for a wide array of common medications.

The Yale analysis also stated that "it seems clear that the report is not a serious scientific analysis but, rather, a document crafted to serve a political agenda" and that "medical treatment for gender dysphoria does meet generally accepted professional medical standards and is not experimental or investigational".

Prisoners' rights

In 1992, UC Irvine researchers published an article detailing medical experiments performed on every trans female inmate in the California state prison system, ending with all subjects being indefinitely taken off hormone therapy. The authors wrote: "withdrawal of therapy was also associated with adverse symptoms in 60 of the 86 transsexuals. Rebound androgenization, hot flashes, moodiness, and irritability or depression were the most frequent complaints." At the time, no right to access gender appropriate care existed in California state prisons.

According to the Vera Institute, 16% of trans adults in the US have been incarcerated, compared to 2.7% of cis adults, and trans people make up 59% of prison sexual assault victims.

In September 2011, a California state court denied the request of a California inmate, Lyralisa Stevens, for sex reassignment surgery at the state's expense.

On January 17, 2014, in Kosilek v. Spencer a three-judge panel of the First Circuit Court of Appeals ordered the Massachusetts Department of Corrections to provide Michelle Kosilek, a Massachusetts inmate, with sex reassignment surgery. It said denying the surgery violated Kosilek's Eighth Amendment rights, which included "receiving medically necessary treatment ... even if that treatment strikes some as odd or unorthodox".

On April 3, 2015, the U.S. Department of Justice intervened in a federal lawsuit filed in Georgia to argue that denying hormone treatment for transgender inmates violates their rights. It contended that the state's policy that only allows for continuing treatments begun before incarceration was insufficient and that inmate treatment needs to be based on ongoing assessments. The case was brought by Ashley Diamond, an inmate who had used hormone treatment for seventeen years before entering the Georgia prison system.

On May 11, 2018, the US Bureau of Prisons announced that prison guidelines issued by the Obama Administration in January 2017 to allow transgender prisoners to be transferred to prisons housing inmates of the gender which they identify with had been rescinded and that assigned sex at birth would once again determine where transgender prisoners are jailed.

In August 2022, a federal judge in Nebraska ruled against a transgender woman who had been denied gender affirming care in prison, and placed in a cell with a male sex offender that proceeded to sexually assault her. In his ruling, the judge declared there to be insufficient evidence of deliberate indifference on the prison's part to the plaintiff's gender dysphoria, and that the plaintiff hadn't sufficiently proven that she'd suffered more than minimal injuries from the sexual assault, stating that he found no support for the notion that a substantial risk of harm or deliberate indifference to it "could be plausibly inferred from a prospective cellmate's conviction of sexual offenses coupled with the alleged vulnerability of a transgender inmate transitioning to a woman in a men's prison".

V-coding

A 2018 report from the Indiana Maurer University School of Law, along with a subsequent report in the UCLA Journal of Gender and Law, found that it was common for trans women placed in men's prisons to be assigned to cells with aggressive cisgender male cellmates as both a reward and a means of placation for said cellmates, so as to maintain social control and to, as one inmate described it, "keep the violence rate down". Trans women used in this manner are often raped daily. This process is known as "V-coding", and has been described as so common that it is effectively "a central part of a trans woman's sentence".

The report also found it common for correctional officers to publicly strip search trans women inmates, before putting their bodies on display for not only the other correctional officers, but for the other prisoners. Trans women in this situation are sometimes made to dance, present, or masturbate at the CO's discretion.

The prisoners serving as "customers" for these women are informally referred to as "husbands". A 2021 California study found that 69% of trans women prisoners reported being made to perform sexual acts they would have rather not, 58.5% reported being violently sexually assaulted, and 88% overall reported being made to take part in a "marriage-like relationship". Trans women who physically resist the rape are often criminally charged with assault and placed in solitary confinement, the assault charge then being used to extend the woman's prison stay and deny her parole.

Immigration

In 2000, the US Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals concluded that "gay men with female sexual identities [sic] in Mexico constitute a 'particular social group'" that was persecuted and was entitled to asylum in the US (Hernandez-Montiel v. INS). Since then, several cases have reinforced and clarified the decision. Morales v. Gonzales (2007) is the only published decision in asylum law that uses "male-to-female transsexual" instead of "gay man with female sexual identity". An immigration judge stated that, under Hernandez-Montiel, Morales would have been eligible for asylum (if not for her criminal conviction).

Critics have argued that allowing transgender people to apply for asylum "would invite a flood of people who could claim a 'well-founded fear' of persecution". Precise numbers are unknown, but Immigration Equality, a nonprofit for LGBT immigrants, estimates hundreds of cases.

The United States has no process for accepting visa requests for third gender citizens from other countries. In 2015, trans HIV activist Amruta Alpesh Soni's request for a visa was delayed because her gender is listed as "T" (for transgender) on her Indian passport. In order to receive a visa, the State Department requires the gender identification on the visa to match the gender identification on the passport.

Military

Main article: Transgender personnel in the United States military

Currently, transgender people are allowed to fully serve in the military and have been able to since 2021.

History

Discharges for gender transitioning were once commonplace. In one case, a trans person who had had gender-reassignment surgery was discharged from the Air Force Reserve, a decision supported by the Court of Appeals.

Obama administration

In 2015, the Pentagon reviewed its policy regarding transgender service members and announced that its ban would be removed. It announced on June 30, 2016, that, effective immediately, existing servicemembers who came out as transgender would no longer be discharged, denied reenlistment, involuntarily separated, or denied continuation of service simply because of their gender, and that, starting in July 2017, people who already identify as transgender were welcome to join the military so long as they had already adapted to their self-identified gender for at least an 18-month period.

Trump administration

President Donald Trump tweeted on July 26, 2017, that transgender individuals will not be allowed to "serve in any capacity in the U.S. military". Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Joseph Dunford pushed back, saying that the Secretary of Defense needed time to review this order. "In the meantime," he said, "we will continue to treat all of our personnel with respect." On August 1, 2017, the Palm Center released a letter signed by 56 retired generals and admirals, opposing the proposed ban on transgender military service members. The letter stated that, if implemented, the ban would "deprive the military of mission-critical talent" and would compel cisgender service members "to choose between reporting their comrades or disobeying policy". To challenge Trump's intended policy, at least four lawsuits were filed (Jane Doe v. Trump, Stone v. Trump, Karnoski v. Trump, and Stockman v. Trump), as well as bipartisan Senate and House bills (S. 1820 and H.R. 4041). On August 25, 2017, Trump signed a presidential memorandum to formalize his request for an implementation plan from the Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of Homeland Security. Several days later, Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis announced that he would set up a panel of experts to provide recommendations and that, meanwhile, currently serving transgender troops would be allowed to remain. After another memorandum in 2018, and a further memorandum in 2019, the procedures regarding serving in the armed forces were finalized.

Biden administration

President Joe Biden overturned the laws the Trump Administration put in place to ban transgender people from serving in the military on January 25, 2021, only five days after he took the oath of office. Biden said, "It is my conviction as Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces that gender identity should not be a bar to military service. Moreover, there is substantial evidence that allowing transgender individuals to serve in the military does not have any meaningful negative impact on the Armed Forces."

Biden's executive order was implemented in a step by step process. The order Trump signed banning transgender people from the military was to be reversed, the Department of Defense was to correct the record of anyone dismissed from service due to their gender identity, and the Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of Homeland Security were to begin the process of allowing transgender service members to serve openly. On April 30, 2021, the United States Department of Defense enacted a new policy which required better medical service and assistance to transgender people serving in the United States Military.

In February 2024, the Veterans Administration issued a final ruling that it would not cover gender-affirming surgery.

Taxes

IRS Publication 502 lists medical expenses that are tax-deductible to the extent they 1) exceed 7.5% of the individual's adjusted gross income, and 2) were not paid for by any insurance or other third party. For example, a person with $20,000 gross adjusted income can deduct all medical expenses after the first $1,500 spent. If that person incurred $16,000 in medical expenses during the tax year, then $14,500 is deductible. At higher incomes where the 7.5% floor becomes substantial, the deductible amount is often less than the standard deduction, in which case it is not cost-effective to claim.

IRS Publication 502 includes several deductions that may apply to gender transition treatments, including some operations.The deduction for operations was denied to a trans woman but was restored in tax court. The deductibility of the other items in Publication 502 was never in dispute.

Sports

See also: Transgender people in sports

Map of state laws which ban transgender athletes from participating in the sport of their gender identity, as of June 2023:

  Law enacted which bans trans athletes from participating in sports based on their gender identity; enforces gender classifications in sports based on registered biological sex

  Law preventing trans athletes from participating in sport in their gender identity enacted, but currently blocked from enforcement via court order

26 U.S. States have banned transgender people from sports under their gender identity in various capacities. These states include Texas, Arkansas, Florida, Alabama, Oklahoma, Kentucky, Mississippi, Tennessee, West Virginia, South Carolina, Utah, South Dakota, Montana, Iowa, Arizona, Idaho, Wyoming, Indiana, Louisiana, Kansas, Georgia, North Dakota, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Alaska and Ohio. The passage of legislation against transgender youth has seen increases in calls to Trans Lifeline, a suicide crisis hotline run by and for transgender people. Some of these bans only apply to school sports and some only apply to transgender women, but not transgender men.

In Oklahoma, all students who wish to play sports must submit a notarized affidavit of biological sex assigned at birth, under penalty of perjury.

In August 2022, USA Cycling, citing new regulations on trans athletes, retroactively stripped trans woman Leia Genis of her silver medal earned at the Track National Championships that had taken place in 2022.

Transgender rights organizations have argued that these discriminatory laws are not about protecting women's sports, but rather are attempts to "undermine the existence of transgender people." Transgender advocates have noted that hormone replacement therapy and testosterone suppression reduces muscle mass and physical strength in transgender women, reducing the possibility of a competitive advantage. Transgender inclusion in sports is supported by the Women's Sports Foundation, the Women's National Basketball Players Association (WNBPA), the National Women's Law Center, and Athlete Ally, as well as United States Women's National Soccer Team Captain Megan Rapinoe, tennis legend Billie Jean King, WNBA Minnesota Lynx coach Cheryl Reeve, and WNBA star Candace Parker.

The US Department of Education has said transgender students are protected under Title IX.

In November 2022, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the Miss United States of America pageant was allowed to categorically bar trans women from the competition, stating that the pageant's purpose was to celebrate "the ideal vision of American womanhood", and that allowing trans women to compete would make the pageant unable to do this. (This is a different pageant from Miss USA, which does admit trans women.)

In early 2023, the Florida High School Athletics Association recommended that all female athletes be mandated to supply up to date information on their menstrual cycles to a database accessible by their school's administrators. This was speculated by many to be a method of both enforcing abortion restrictions, and detecting any female athletes who might be trans women in violation of the state's ban.

In early 2023, a federal bill that would ban transgender women from competing in women's sports nationwide was introduced as HR 734, "Protecting Women and Girls in Sports Act." The bill passed the house in April 2023 with all republicans voting for it and all democrats voting against it. The senate is not expected to take up the bill and President Biden vowed to veto it if it reached his desk.

Biden administration rule change

In April 2023, the Biden administration proposed a Title IX rule change which would declare blanket "one size fits all" bans on trans athletes from teams consistent with their genders, a violation of Title IX, but would authorize such bans if done for a number of reasons, including "fairness in competition". According to the proposal, this would most likely mean that bans that apply to elementary school students would be forbidden, but bans on high school and college students would be authorized under Title IX.

After two delays, the final changes to Title IX were published in April 2024. The new changes cemented protections for LGBT students under federal law and reversed a number of Trump-era policies that dictated how schools should respond to cases of alleged sexual misconduct in K-12 schools and college campuses. They also effectively broadened the scope of Title IX by extending the law's reach to prohibit discrimination and harassment based on sexual orientation and gender identity, and widen the range of sexual harassment complaints that schools will be responsible for investigating. However, it did not explicitly say schools are forbidden from banning transgender women from competing in women's sports. In response to these new changes, over 20 republican-led states sued the Biden Administration and refused to follow the new rules. In June 2024, a judge temporarily blocked President Biden's proposed changes to the interpretation of Title IX in Texas. A few days later, a judge issued a injunction temporary blocking the rules in Idaho, Louisiana, Mississippi and Montana. The week after that, a judge temporarily blocked the law in Tennessee, Kentucky, Ohio, Indiana, Virginia and West Virginia. On July 2, 2024, a federal judge temporarily blocked the law in Kansas, Alaska, Utah and Wyoming. This ruling also blocks the rule from taking effect in schools in Stillwater, Oklahoma, the home of a middle school student who joined the lawsuit, as well as any schools attended by members of the Young America's Foundation and the children of members of Moms for Liberty — two national conservative groups that signed onto the lawsuit. On July 17, 2024, both the Fifth and Sixth Circuits upheld two of the blocks. On July 26, 2024, a federal court temporarily blocked the rule from taking effect in Iowa, Arkansas, Missouri, Iowa, Nebraska, North Dakota and South Dakota.

Summary

Transgender Identity	/ (Most States recognize and allow the ability of transgender individuals to change their legal gender, though varies widely.)
Right to change gender on Birth Certificates or Passports	/ (Legal gender change allowed in 48 states; prohibited by statute in Tennessee as of 2020 and in Montana and Oklahoma as of 2022; since April 11, 2022 by way of "self determination" and an X option on United States passports for individuals at a federal level)
Anti-Discrimination laws in Employment	(Since 2020)
Anti-Discrimination laws in Housing	/ (Legal protections in 22 states)
Anti-Discrimination laws in Public Accommodations	/ (Protections in only a minority of states)
Anti-discrimination laws in health insurance
LGBT anti-bullying law in schools and colleges	/
LGBT anti-discrimination law in hospitals
Freedom of Expression	/(Multiple States have so-called "Don't say gay" laws in place that limit instruction and discussion of LGBT issues in the classroom)
Transgender people allowed to serve openly in the Military	(Transgender personnel allowed to serve since 2021)
Transgender People allowed in the Military
Transgender health care, such as access to SRS and Hormone medications not restricted by law	/ (Multiple states have blocked state Medicaid funding for transgender health care services, and have also made health care for youth with gender dysphoria Illegal.)
Transgender Identity declassified as a mental illness	(Reclassified as 'gender dysphoria' under DSM-5 since 2013)
Transgender people allowed to play in sports that match their gender identity	/ (Multiple states have banned transgender women and girls from competing in women's sports.)

See also

• Transgender disenfranchisement in the United States
• Transphobia in the United States
• Identity documents in the United States
• History of transgender people in the United States
• History of violence against LGBT people in the United States
• LGBT rights in the United States
• Intersex rights in the United States
• Transgender rights
• Name change
• List of transgender-related topics
• 2020s anti-LGBT movement in the United States
• Parental rights movement
• Anti-gender movement
• Transgender rights movement
• Transgender history
• Violence against LGBT people