Legal Challenges to President Trump’s Anti-LGBTQ+ Executive Orders

Since taking office, President Trump has issued a series of executive orders targeting vulnerable communities, including LGBTQ+ people and their loved ones. Some of the directives will create immediate, tremendous harm, while others will take time and cooperation from policymakers to fully implement.

But we’re fighting back.

Within the first few weeks of the new administration, GLAD Law filed multiple lawsuits challenging these harmful orders.

And we’re making progress. GLAD Law and attorneys across the country are working to stop, delay, and minimize the impact of these attacks on LGBTQ+ rights.

Learn about the executive orders and legal challenges:

How GLAD Law is Fighting Back

GLAD Law and the National Center for Lesbian Rights (NCLR) are challenging Trump’s ban on military service members:

Talbott v. Trump: We are representing individuals who want to enlist as well as active service members who bring decades of experience across all military branches, contributing among the highest levels of service.

  • The latest (as of 3/26): On March 18, the court issued a nationwide preliminary injunction – halting the ban’s enforcement. On March 26, Judge Reyes rejected a Trump administration motion to dissolve the preliminary injunction. As a result, implementation of the ban has been halted and transgender servicemembers and recruits are protected from the bans significant harms while the future of the ban is being decided in court. Learn more.

Ireland v. Hegseth: We are representing two longstanding, high-ranking Air Force service members who are facing significant disruption to their service.

  • The latest (as of 3/24): On March 24th, the New Jersey federal district court granted a Temporary Restraining Order to keep Staff Sergeant Nicholas Bear Bade and Master Sergeant Logan Ireland from being further impacted by the Trump administration’s transgender military ban while a case challenging it in D.C. federal district court moves forward. 

Moe v. Trump, Doe v. Bondi, and Jones v. Bondi: GLAD Law and NCLR have filed three lawsuits challenging sections of an executive order that directs the federal Bureau of Prisons to house transgender women in men’s prisons and to unlawfully withhold necessary medical care. We are defending transgender women who were suddenly removed from their general population housing in women’s prisons, placed in special housing units (SHU), and faced imminent transfer to men’s facilities. They were also at risk of having their essential medical care terminated.

  • The latest (as of 2/12): We secured temporary restraining orders in Moe and Doe, preventing our clients from being transferred to men’s facilities and ensuring their continued access to necessary medical care. On February 11, we filed our third case, Jones v. Trump, in U.S. District Court.

Tirrell and Turmelle v. Edelblut: GLAD Law and the ACLU of New Hampshire are defending Parker Tirrell and Iris Turmelle, two transgender high schoolers challenging the ban that aims to keep them and other trans girls from playing the sports they love with their friends. The case was originally filed as a challenge to a New Hampshire state law, but was expanded to include President Trump after his February 5 executive order to ban trans girls from sports nationwide.

  • The latest (as of 2/12): We expanded our lawsuit beyond New Hampshire, adding a challenge to President Trump’s executive order banning transgender girls and women from sports nationwide. Learn more.

Banning Transgender Servicemembers

President Trump issued an executive order on January 27, 2025 banning transgender people from serving in the U.S. military. This reckless ban weakens our military, subjecting qualified transgender servicemembers to discharge because of who they are and turning away skilled individuals who meet rigorous standards and are ready to serve.

Cases

Barriers for Transgender People in Public Life

Executive Order 14168, issued on January 20, 2025, is an alarming attempt to undo the basic protections that allow transgender people to go about their daily lives. It directs the State Department to stop issuing accurate passports for trans people, instructs the Bureau of Prisons to deny incarcerated transgender people health care and appropriate housing, and charges the Department of Housing and Urban Development to reverse rules that give trans people safe access to shelters. It also pushes federal agencies to remove mention of gender identity from their websites, materials, and forms.

Cases

  • Defending the rights of transgender women who are incarcerated:
  • Orr v. Trump, filed by the ACLU and ACLU of Massachusetts, challenges the State Department’s refusal to issue correct passports for transgender people
  • San Francisco AIDS Foundation v. Trump, filed by Lambda Legal on behalf of multiple LGBTQ, Health, and HIV organizations, challenges three executive orders that seek to deny the existence of transgender people and prohibits and prohibits federal contractors from respecting their identities, terminate equity-related grants, and prohibit federal contractors and grantees from employing DEIA principles in their work.
  • National Urban League v. Trump, filed by Lambda Legal on behalf of the National Urban League, the National Fair Housing Alliance, and the AIDS Foundation of Chicago, challenges three executive orders that target DEIA initiatives and seek to deny the existence of transgender people.
  • Rhode Island Latino Arts v. National Endowment for the Arts, filed by the ACLU and ACLU of Rhode Island, challenges the NEA requirement that grant applicants certify they will not use use federal funds to “promote gender ideology.”

Restricting Health Care

On January 28, 2025, President Trump signed an order intended to ban health care for transgender young people under age 19. It seeks to deny coverage for medically necessary care to transgender dependents of federal employees and seeks to ban federal funding for any healthcare organization that provides this necessary and proven healthcare for transgender people under 19.

Cases

  • PFLAG v. Trump, filed by ACLU, Lambda Legal, and the ACLU of Maryland
    • The latest (as of 3/4): A federal judge granted a request for preliminary injunction, blocking enforcement of the executive orders threatening federal funding for providers of gender-affirming medical care for people under 19. Learn more.
  • Washington v. Trump, filed by Attorneys General from Washington, Minnesota, and Oregon

Targeting Transgender Girls in Sports

President Trump signed an executive order barring transgender girls from participating in school sports. President Trump’s order subjects transgender girls to discrimination in violation of federal equal protection guarantees, including their rights under Title IX. The order also unlawfully subjects schools to the threat of losing federal funding for allowing transgender girls to play school sports.

Cases

Resources

Sign up for the latest updates on LGBTQ+ rights and GLAD Law’s work toward justice.

Get Updates