U.S. Federal Courts
Appeals court hears case challenging Florida’s trans healthcare ban
District court judge concluded the law was discriminatory, unconstitutional
Parties in Doe v. Ladapo, a case challenging Florida’s ban on healthcare for transgender youth and restrictions on the medical interventions available to trans adults, presented oral arguments on Wednesday before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit in Atlanta.
The case was appealed by defendants representing the Sunshine State following a decision in June 2024 by Judge Robert Hinkle of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Florida, who found “the law and rules unconstitutional and unenforceable on equal protection grounds,” according to a press release from the National Center for Lesbian Rights, which is involved in the litigation on behalf of the plaintiffs.
The district court additionally found the Florida healthcare ban unconstitutional on the grounds that it was “motivated by purposeful discrimination against transgender people,” though the ban and restrictions will remain in effect pending a decision by the appellate court.
Joining NCLR in the lawsuit are attorneys from GLAD Law, the Human Rights Campaign, Southern Legal Counsel, and the law firms Lowenstein Sandler and Jenner and Block.
“As a mother who simply wants to protect and love my child for who she is, I pray that the Eleventh Circuit will affirm the district court’s thoughtful and powerful order, restoring access to critical healthcare for all transgender Floridians,” plaintiff Jane Doe said. “No one should have to go through what my family has experienced.”
“As a transgender adult just trying to live my life and care for my family, it is so demeaning that the state of Florida thinks it’s their place to dictate my healthcare decisions,” said plaintiff Lucien Hamel.
“Members of the legislature have referred to the high quality healthcare I have received, which has allowed me to live authentically as myself, as ‘mutilation’ and ‘an abomination’ and have called the providers of this care ‘evil,’” Hamel added. “We hope the appellate court sees these rules and laws for what truly are: cruel.”
“Transgender adults don’t need state officials looking over their shoulders, and families of transgender youth don’t need the government dictating how to raise their children,” said Shannon Minter, legal director of NCLR. “The district court heard the evidence and found that these restrictions are based on bias, not science. The court of appeals should affirm that judgment.”
Noting Hinkle’s conclusion that the ban and restrictions were “motivated by animus, not science or evidence,” Simone Chris, who leads Southern Legal Counsel’s Transgender Rights Initiative, said, “The state has loudly and proudly enacted bans on transgender people accessing healthcare, using bathrooms, transgender teachers using their pronouns and titles, and a slough of other actions making it nearly impossible for transgender individuals to live in this state.”
Lowenstein Sandler Partner Thomas Redburn said, “The defendants have offered nothing on appeal that could serve as a valid basis for overturning that finding” by the district court.
“Not only does this dangerous law take away parents’ freedom to make responsible medical decisions for their child, it inserts the government into private health care matters that should be between adults and their providers,” said Jennifer Levi, senior director of transgender and queer rights at GLAD Law.
U.S. Federal Courts
Second judge blocks Trump’s anti-trans military ban
Federal courts in D.C. and Washington State have now issued injunctions
The U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington on Thursday became the second court to issue a nationwide injunction blocking the enforcement of President Donald Trump’s executive order barring transgender people from military service.
The order in Schilling v. Trump from Judge Benjamin Hale Settle comes after Judge Ana Reyes of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia blocked implementation of the ban earlier this month in Talbott v. Trump.
Friday was the date by which the Pentagon was to begin identifying and separating transgender service members from the armed forces, per Trump’s executive action.
The lead attorneys in Talbott v. Trump, GLAD Law Senior Director of Transgender and Queer Rights Jennifer Levi and Shannon Minter, legal director of the National Center for Lesbian Rights, shared statements about the injunction in a press release by NCLR.
“Given the thousands of brave and decorated transgender servicemembers facing unthinkable harms as the result of this ban, we are heartened but not surprised by today’s decision,” Levi said. “President Trump’s executive order and Secretary [Pete] Hegseth’s implementation represent a policy that cannot be constitutionally justified. Thousands of transgender servicemembers currently serving have clearly demonstrated they meet all military standards, with many deployed to critical missions worldwide, proving their capabilities beyond question.”
Levi continued, “These dedicated servicemembers and their families have earned our nation’s gratitude and respect, and the government has a responsibility to honor the commitments it has made to them. This is about keeping faith with Americans who have risked everything to defend our freedoms.”
“In both Talbott and Shilling, it was abundantly clear to the court that it must act swiftly to protect our troops from an unconstitutional and indefensible ban that would disrupt the lives and dismantle the careers of thousands of transgender servicemembers and their families,” Minter said. “The harms associated with this ban are gut-wrenching.”
Minter continued, “In each of these cases, the government did not even attempt to claim that any evidence supported its position. There is no reason to discharge individuals who are serving capably and honorably.”
U.S. Federal Courts
Federal judge hears case that challenges Trump passport executive order
State Department no longer issues passports with ‘X’ gender markers
A federal judge in Boston on Tuesday heard oral arguments in a lawsuit against President Donald Trump’s executive order that bans the State Department from issuing passports with “X” gender markers.
Ashton Orr, Zaya Perysian, Sawyer Soe, Chastain Anderson, Drew Hall, Bella Boe, and Reid Solomon-Lane are the plaintiffs in the class action lawsuit the American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU of Massachusetts, and the private law firm Covington & Burling LPP filed in U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts. The lawsuit names Trump and Secretary of State Marco Rubio as defendants.
Former Secretary of State Antony Blinken in June 2021 announced the State Department would begin to issue gender-neutral passports and documents for American citizens who were born overseas.
Dana Zzyym, an intersex U.S. Navy veteran who identifies as nonbinary, in 2015 filed a federal lawsuit against the State Department after it denied their application for a passport with an “X” gender marker. Zzyym in October 2021 received the first gender-neutral American passport.
The State Department policy took effect on April 11, 2022.
Trump signed the executive order that overturned it shortly after he took office. Rubio later directed State Department personnel to “suspend any application requesting an ‘X’ sex marker and do not take any further action pending additional guidance from the department.”
“Even before Donald Trump was inaugurated, it was clear to me he wanted to control the lives and identities of transgender people like myself,” said Orr, a transgender man who lives in West Virginia, in a press release the ACLU released before U.S. District Judge Julia Kobick heard the case. “Like many others, I rushed to update my passport hoping I could get an accurate version. Now, the State Department has suspended my application and withheld all my documents from me, including my passport, my birth certificate, and even my marriage license.”
Li Nowlin-Sohl, a staff attorney for the ACLU’s LGBTQ and HIV Project, described the Trump-Vance administration’s passport policy as “openly discriminatory and animated by a transparent desire to drive transgender people out of public life altogether.”
Germany, Denmark, Finland, and the Netherlands are among the countries that have issued travel advisories for trans and nonbinary people who plan to visit the U.S.
WorldPride is scheduled to take place in D.C. from May 17-June 8. InterPride, the organization that coordinates WorldPride events, on March 12 issued its own travel advisory for trans and nonbinary people who want to travel to the U.S.
It is unclear when Kobick will issue her ruling.
U.S. Federal Courts
Court halts removal of two transgender service members
Case challenging anti-trans military ban proceeds in D.C.
A federal court in New Jersey issued a temporary restraining order on Monday that will halt the separation of two transgender service members from the U.S. military while their case in D.C. challenging the Trump-Vance administration’s ban moves forward.
The order by Judge Christine O’Hearn pauses proceedings against Staff Sgt. Nicholas Bear Bade and Master Sgt. Logan Ireland, who “have been pulled from key deployments and placed on administrative absence against their will because of the ban,” according to a joint press release Monday by the National Center for Lesbian Rights and GLAD Law, which are representing the service members together with other litigants in Ireland v. Hegseth and in the case underway in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, Talbott v. Trump.
“That court granted a preliminary injunction March 18 barring the Department of Defense from implementing the ban, finding that it discriminates based on sex and transgender status; that it is ‘soaked in animus;’ and that, due to the government’s failure to present any evidence supporting the ban, it is ‘highly unlikely’ to survive any level of judicial review,” the groups noted in their press release.
Ireland spoke with the Washington Blade in January along with other trans service members and former service members who shared their experiences with the military and their feelings on the new administration’s efforts to bar trans people from the U.S. armed forces.
LGBTQ budget advocates fight for D.C. resources in a tough fiscal year
Washington Blade’s Pride on the Pier returns bigger than ever with two-day WorldPride celebration
Md. schools plan to comply with federal DEI demands
Gay, nonbinary parent fights for family in Argentina’s courts
Science must not be a weapon against trans people
It’s time for new leadership on the Maryland LGBTQIA+ Commission
White House does not ‘respond’ to reporters’ requests with pronouns included
INDIGNACIÓN: ¡El transfeminicidio de Sara Millerey en Colombia nos cuestiona como sociedad!
‘Gay is Good’ Pride Pils Can Celebrates Frank Kameny’s 100th Birthday for WorldPride in D.C.
THC Drinks: What You Should Know About Cannabis Beverages
-
Opinions4 days agoIt’s time for new leadership on the Maryland LGBTQIA+ Commission
-
The White House4 days agoWhite House does not ‘respond’ to reporters’ requests with pronouns included
-
Noticias en Español5 days agoINDIGNACIÓN: ¡El transfeminicidio de Sara Millerey en Colombia nos cuestiona como sociedad!
-
Arts & Entertainment4 days ago‘Gay is Good’ Pride Pils Can Celebrates Frank Kameny’s 100th Birthday for WorldPride in D.C.