Part of a series on |
Transgender topics |
---|
The persecution of transgender people under the second Donald Trump administration refers to government measures beginning in January 2025 that removed federal recognition of transgender people, eliminated or restricted many of their legal rights in the United States, and were accompanied by anti-transgender rhetoric and misinformation.
The Trump administration's actions targeting transgender people form part of the broader 2020s anti-LGBTQ movement in the United States and the anti-gender movement. Documented actions of the administration include the removal of legal rights, the erasure of research and trans education materials, [1] censorship of inclusive language, dehumanization, purges of transgender government employees, [2] restrictions on passports and international travel, [3] promotion of transgender health care misinformation, attempts to intimidate or deter providers of gender-affirming care, and portrayal of transgender people as a social threat. Collectively, such efforts to erase transgender people through laws, rhetoric, and denial of health care are increasingly referred to as transgender genocide in contemporary human rights, activist, and some scholarly discourse. Commentators and scholars have compared these actions to the early stages of persecution of LGBTQ people in Nazi Germany. [4]
At the United Nations, the Trump administration opposed inclusive language in international agreements, targeted the use of "gender," insisted on recognition of only "biological sex", and tied these positions to pressure on other countries and alignment with repressive regimes. [5]
Following Donald Trump's inauguration of his second presidency on January 20, 2025 he began issuing a series of executive orders targeting transgender people across the United States. [6] [7]
On January 20, 2025, shortly after being inaugurated, President Donald Trump signed an Executive Order, [8] [9] [7] which defined sex in the eyes of the federal government as a male-female binary, with "female" and "male" defined as "a person belonging, at conception to the sex that produces the large reproductive cell" and a "person belonging, at conception, to the sex that produces the small reproductive cell", respectively. [8] The order also mandated that:
Provisions of the order have faced legal challenges, with temporary restraining orders having been issued to suspend the withholding of federal funding to programs that fund gender-affirming care and promote "gender ideology", the forced transfers of transgender inmates to facilities congruent with their sex assigned at birth, and the mass removal of documents published by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Food and Drug Administration, Department of Health and Human Services that mention topics related to "gender ideology". [11] [12] [13]
In July 2025, The Lancet published an investigation which alleged that around half of all US health datasets were secretly and substantially altered in the two months after the executive order was signed, with the alterations being done to remove messages that "promote or otherwise inculcate gender ideology". [14] [15]
On January 27, 2025, Trump signed an executive order declaring that a soldier being trans "conflicts with a soldier's commitment to an honorable, truthful, and disciplined lifestyle, even in one's personal life" and that trans people "cannot satisfy the rigorous standards necessary for military service". [16]
On March 18, 2025, Judge Ana C. Reyes blocked the executive order, ruling that banning trans people from the military likely violated their constitutional rights. [17]
A May 15 memo later detailed how trans service members would be discharged, saying that they would be given the discharge code of "JDK", which is typically used to indicate that a soldier is considered a threat to national security, and which can prevent them from getting future jobs or security clearances. [18] An August 4 United States Air Force memo announced that long-serving transgender members normally eligible for retirement benefits would be denied them. [19]
On January 28, 2025, Trump signed an executive order to "Protect Children from Chemical and Surgical Mutilation". The order described gender-affirming care for minors as "chemical and surgical mutilation of children" as well as "maiming" and "sterilizing". [21] It stated "countless children" who received such care would regret a "horrifying tragedy that they will never be able to conceive children of their own or nurture their children through breastfeeding." [22] The order also described the World Professional Association for Transgender Health's (WPATH) guidance as "junk science". [22] [21]
The order states that the US Federal Government will not "fund, sponsor, promote, assist, or support the so-called 'transition' of a child from one sex to another." [23] The provisions include:
In response, some hospitals paused providing gender-affirming care for minors, while others continued. Attorneys general from 15 states said their states are committed to continuing to provide gender-affirming care to minors. Multiple groups filed lawsuits challenging the legality of the executive order. In response to one of the lawsuits, several federal judges issued injunctions blocking the government from withholding federal funds from hospitals that provide gender affirming care to minors. [25] [13] Following the injunction, some hospitals that initially paused gender-affirming care for minors resumed the care. [26] [27]
On January 29, 2025, Trump signed an executive order "Ending Radical Indoctrination in K-12 Schooling". [28] Under the order, law enforcement are directed to conduct investigations of educational or education-related institutions suspected of involvement in the "instruction, advancement, or promotion of gender ideology" declaring such ideas to be anti-American and subversive. [29] The order further directs law enforcement to criminally prosecute any teacher who "unlawfully facilitates" the social transition of a transgender minor. Listed examples of unlawful facilitation include psychiatric counseling by a school counselor, referring to the student using their preferred name and/or pronouns, referring to a student as "nonbinary", and allowing the student to use segregated facilities or participate on segregated sports teams differing from those of their assigned sex. The order directs that educators in violation of this law be prosecuted as having committed sexual exploitation of a minor, and/or practicing medicine without a license. [30] [31] [32] Additionally, schools found in violation would have their federal funding revoked. [33]
On February 5, 2025, Trump signed an executive order titled "Keeping Men Out of Women's Sports", which directs federal agencies and state attorneys general to immediately enforce a prohibition of transgender girls and women from participating in women's sports. [34] [35] The order does not ban transgender men athletes from playing on male sports teams. [36] As part of this order's implementation, the Department of Education urged high school and college athletics organizations NCAA and NFHS to revoke female transgender athletes' records and restore cisgender athletes' ones. [36] The State Department also announced a ban on transgender athletes from entering the United States if they attempt to compete in women's sports, and that visa applicants suspected of such would have their file marked with the letters 'SWS25' for the purposes of tracking. Visa applicants for any purpose who list a gender other than their assigned sex on their visa application will be permanently banned from entering the United States on grounds of "fraud". [37]
At the United Nations, the United States under Trump routinely uses their influence action against transgender rights globally, even when unrelated to the topic of discussion. For example, in a June 2025 meeting on chemical pollution, the American delegate made a point of repeatedly disputing any gender-related language that did not explicitly "recognize women are biologically female and men are biologically male"; while in another case, the United States disapproved of a declaration supporting the rights of women and girls because it included no language to exclude trans women from its purview. Both advocates and the Trump Administration have suggested that the United States might use compliance at the UN as a metric for determining which countries receive foreign aid. [38]
On January 28, 2025, Trump ordered a freeze on all federal funding grants, loans, and aid while those receiving them were assessed to make sure they were not promoting "Marxist equity, transgenderism, and green new deal social engineering policies". [39]
On September 4, 2025, multiple news organizations reported that the Department of Justice under Attorney General Pam Bondi was looking into ways to limit transgender individuals' right to keep and bear arms. [40] [41] The discussions came in the aftermath of the Annunciation Catholic Church shooting, which, according to the Associated Press (AP), was perpetrated by a transgender person. [42] The potential limitations drew condemnation from both LGBTQ rights groups as well as gun rights advocacy groups, such as the Gun Owners of America and the National Rifle Association (NRA), with the latter groups opposing blanket gun bans. [42] The NRA said, "the NRA supports the Second Amendment rights of all law-abiding Americans to purchase, possess and use firearms. NRA does not, and will not, support any policy proposals that implement sweeping gun bans that arbitrarily strip law-abiding citizens of their Second Amendment rights without due process." [43] Per the AP, "LGBTQ advocates called it misguided and dangerous as the vast majority of mass shootings in the U.S. are carried out by men and do not involve transgender people." [42]
Several Republican-run states have followed the lead of the Trump administration on transgender issues, enacting legislation to limit access to healthcare, government services and public life for transgender people. [44]
In February 2025, Alabama and several other states introduced legislation to define gender to be congruent with sex assigned at birth, following on from Trump's executive order declaring the same. [45]
In August 2025, the Texas State Legislature introduced Senate Bill 8 (SB8), a bathroom bill that would restrict transgender people’s access to public bathrooms of their gender. Under the bill facilities could be fined up to $125,000 per offense, as well as authorizing private citizens reports. [46]
Also in August 2025, Alaskan republican Matt Heilala introduced a draft to the Alaska State Medical Board that would discipline any medical providers in the states that are providing gender-affirming care for youth. The board unanimously approved the proposal on August 22, 2025 without public input on the proposal. Heilala announced his immediate resignation following the conclusion of the meeting, and announced his plan to run for Governor of Alaska at the next election. In response, Tom Pittman, executive director of Anchorage-based advocacy and health care organization Identity Inc said that "nearly 700 Alaska medical professionals have signed an open letter opposing the changes being considered by the board." [47]
Scholars and extremism experts have warned that the Trump administration’s sustained targeting of transgender people — a group comprising less than 1% of the U.S. population — resembles authoritarian strategies that single out a vulnerable minority in order to consolidate power. Analysts have pointed to historical parallels, such as the Nazi destruction of the Institute for Sexual Research in 1933, where attacks on a visible queer institution were used to galvanize support for broader repression. [48]
Civil rights groups also argue that the Trump administration's language opens the door to wider censorship and repression, noting that book bans and curriculum restrictions have increasingly targeted works on gender, sexuality, and racial justice under the banner of fighting "gender ideology." [48]
Within this climate, Trump has repeatedly characterized transgender identities as a societal menace. In 2024, Trump claimed that children were being given gender-affirming surgery at school, repeating it multiple times throughout his campaign, despite there being no evidence that any school in the United States had ever provided gender-affirming surgery to a student. [49] [50] The New York Times has noted that Trump's directives and speeches regularly use terms such as "maiming" or "junk science" to describe gender-affirming care and the research that supports it. [51] He has called being transgender "lunacy" and "insanity," insisted in speeches that "there are only two genders, male and female," and ridiculed transgender athletes at campaign rallies to cheers from his supporters. [52] Fact-checks of his 2025 State of the Union address noted that Trump falsely claimed taxpayer dollars were spent on "making mice transgender," mischaracterizing NIH-funded medical research into hormone therapy and HIV treatment. [53]
NPR and other outlets have documented a broader pattern in which Trump and allied Republicans seize on mass shootings and other tragedies to falsely identify perpetrators as transgender, part of a political strategy to scapegoat a small minority group. Experts on extremism and disinformation have warned that such rhetoric deliberately fosters fear and division, echoing earlier authoritarian tactics to rally support by vilifying minorities. [48] Claims that the shooter was transgender happen "almost every time there is a school shooting in America", according to the USA Today. Michael Jensen, research director at the National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism, was quoted as saying "I'm aware of no evidence to support the claim that transgender people are disproportionately responsible for mass violence events in the U.S., including shootings in schools. In fact, the data suggests quite the opposite." [54]
In the wake of the assassination of Charlie Kirk, transgender people were almost immediately subject to accusations of responsibility, especially after The Wall Street Journal falsely reported that an internal ATF memo stated that messages were engraved on the cases of the shooter's ammo which expressed "transgender and anti-fascist ideology." [55] Conservative commentator Joey Mannarino, who had previously expressed his desire for trans people to be "rounded up, detained and studied," posted on the social media platform X "If the person who killed Charlie Kirk was a transgender, there can be no mercy for that species any longer. We’ve already tolerated far too much [from] those creatures." [56] A trans woman from Seattle was accused by numerous conservatives on social media of being the shooter. As a result, she received hundreds of abusive messages, including death threats. [57]
In response to Executive Order 14168, The National Endowment for the Arts began forcing all grant applicants to agree not to promote "gender ideology". [58]
Following this, the Trump Administration removed from publicly-run museums works which depicted transgender topics or which were made by trans artists, with The New Yorker describing this by saying that the administration was "just as likely to censor a painting of a trans person by a cis woman as a painting of a cis woman by a trans person". One example such was the National Portrait Gallery removing Amy Sherald's painting "Trans Forming America", which depicted The Statue of Liberty as a black trans woman. [59] [60] [61]
Likewise, privately-run institutions began censoring and removing the works of trans artists as well, in what was speculated by some to be a move to appease donors. [59]
The National Science Foundation compiled an internal list of words the presence of which in a research paper, grant application, or other relevant documentation, would flag a project and put its funding under review. Words that would initiate a review included "gender", "LGBT", and "women", among others. [62] [63] Some transgender scholars reported having their fellowships cut, and being told by the federal government that it was for "promoting gender ideology". [59]
NASA took down webpages relating to LGBTQ+ employee resource groups and diversity at the organization, and according to employees, verbally informed its employees that any display of LGBTQ+ symbols, such as a pride flag in one's workspace, would be met with being placed on administrative leave. [64]
Many major universities during this time, either faced with potential loss of federal funding, changes in state law, or simply of their own accord, began to implement restrictions both on the rights of transgender students and on the teaching of material related to gender identity. This included barring trans students from gender-segregated housing and facilities, [65] banning trans athletes and stripping away any previously won accolades, [66] firing professors who gave instruction that contravened the Trump Administration's position on transgender people, [67] ceasing the provision of gender affirming hormone therapy to transgender students, [68] and destroying books that covered transgender topics. [69]
The Trump administration's anti-transgender agenda has not been confined to U.S. borders but has also been aggressively promoted in international forums, particularly at the United Nations. American delegates have repeatedly objected to the inclusion of the word "gender" in resolutions across a wide range of issues, from global health and women’s rights to environmental treaties on chemical pollution. By insisting that only "biological sex" be recognized in official documents, U.S. representatives have disrupted negotiations, slowed consensus-building, and aligned American positions with those of more repressive regimes. Human rights experts warn that these interventions send a global signal that the rights of transgender, nonbinary, and intersex people are negotiable, undermining decades of international progress toward gender equality. The Trump administration has also tied its stance to broader nationalist goals, suggesting that foreign aid may be contingent on countries adopting similar language, thereby leveraging U.S. power to export its anti-trans policies abroad. [5]
The Trump administration’s actions targeting transgender people have led some transgender Americans to seek refuge abroad. Advocacy organizations and media outlets reported an increase in transgender people leaving the United States or making plans to do so in response to the rollback of rights, workplace exclusions, and the Trump administration’s rhetoric portraying transgender identities as a social threat.
In March 2025, YES! documented cases of transgender asylum seekers in Mexico who cited fear of persecution under Trump's executive orders and anti-trans policies. These asylum seekers said that relocating was a matter of personal safety. [70]
Canadian media reported U.S. transgender families preparing "go bags" and considering asylum after Trump's re-election, citing fears over bathroom bills, the loss of gender-affirming care, and restrictions on passports. [71] [72] Immigration attorneys in Canada reported a surge of inquiries from transgender and non-binary Americans seeking to relocate or claim asylum after Trump’s January 2025 executive orders. Lawyers cited widespread fears over loss of gender-affirming care, restrictions on passports, and safety concerns, and noted that several test cases could establish precedent for U.S. trans nationals claiming refugee protection in Canada. [73] [74] [75]
In April 2025, the Norwegian Green Party proposed granting asylum to transgender Americans on the grounds that they were being persecuted, comparing their situation to marginalized groups in 1930s Germany. The proposal drew attention in European media and was framed as part of a broader debate about democratic backsliding and human rights in the United States. [76] In August 2025, a 28-year-old transgender woman from California, Veronica Clifford-Carlos, challenged the Dutch government's rejection of her asylum claim. Her case, supported by the Dutch NGO LGBT Asylum Support , was described as the first of its kind in the Netherlands, which reported a rise in U.S. citizens applying for asylum since Trump's return to office. [77]
Scholars, human rights organizations, and commentators have debated whether actions under the second Trump administration targeting transgender people amount to genocide, while its description as a form of discrimination and persecution is less controversial.
A number of advocacy and genocide-prevention groups have warned that the cumulative effect of federal and state measures targeting transgender people exhibits genocidal dynamics or "red flags," particularly when coupled with eliminationist rhetoric in public life. These analyses point to policies and statements seeking to remove legal recognition of transgender identity, restrict access to health care, and exclude transgender people from public institutions, and argue that such measures can inflict serious bodily or mental harm on an identifiable group. [78] Commentary has also highlighted public calls to "eradicate transgenderism from public life," which critics characterize as eliminationist or genocidal rhetoric, even where speakers distinguish between "transgenderism" and transgender people. [79]
Many legal scholars argue that transgender people do not meet the Genocide Convention's definition of a protected group, and as such the requirement of intent to physically or biologically destroy a protected group are not satisfied by policies that target transgender people as such, even if the measures cause serious harm. [80] Recent legal scholarship assessing anti-trans legislation in the United States concludes that these actions likely do not meet the legal definition of genocide, while emphasizing the severity of harms imposed. [81]
Commentators and scholars have drawn parallels between the Trump administration's targeting of transgender people and the persecution of LGBTQ people in Nazi Germany. The erasure of research, censorship of language, and targeting of transgender people as a social threat have been repeatedly cited as bearing strong resemblance to the early stages of queer persecution under the Nazi regime. [4] [82] [83]
In 1933, Nazi students destroyed the Institute for Sexual Research in Berlin, founded by Jewish sexologist Magnus Hirschfeld, which had pioneered studies of gender identity and medical transition. Its library of research on transgender and queer lives was burned, an act widely seen as the beginning of the Nazi regime's systematic erasure of queer culture and knowledge. [48] [84] LGBTQ people were later targeted under the Nazi regime through imprisonment, medical experimentation, and, in the case of homosexual men, internment marked by the pink triangle symbol. Several observers have compared this destruction of knowledge with the Trump administration's removal of federal webpages and health datasets referencing transgender populations in early 2025, following executive orders banning "gender ideology." Entire sections of research on HIV, contraceptive use, health equity, and workplace discrimination disappeared from government sites. Critics have described these actions as a form of internet-age book burning. [4]
Parallels have also been drawn between Nazi use of broad ideological categories such as "un-German" and the Trump administration's emphasis on opposing "DEI" or "gender ideology." According to scholars, both function as umbrella terms that designate targeted groups as enemies of the nation and justify their exclusion from public life. [4]
On January 28, 2025, over 170 women's rights organizations, led by the National Women's Law Center, issued an open letter condemning Executive Order 14168. The letter described the order, which defined legal recognition of women strictly by reproductive biology and sought to restrict transgender rights, as "cruel and lawless." The organizations argued that its true intent was to stigmatize and discriminate against transgender, nonbinary, and intersex people while enforcing gender stereotypes. [85] [86] [87]
{{cite news}}
: CS1 maint: bot: original URL status unknown (link)