Why the Fight for Trans Rights Never Gets Easier – or Less Vital
In the Spring of 1999, young people across the country began to prepare for that singular teenage right of passage: Prom. For Diamond Stylz, this time included not just finding the right dress and corsage, but fighting for her right to attend prom at all. School administrators had told the then 17-year-old Stylz just two days before prom that she could not attend the event wearing a dress, despite living as a woman for years.
“At that time,” Stylz reflects, her teachers were “really adamant about teaching me to be a boy” in deference to the cultural sensationalism that trans individuals were somehow wrong.
Stylz knew she wasn’t wrong — the school was. She made the decision to fight this attempt to discriminate against her right to be who she is. With the American Civil Liberties Union of Indiana, Stylz successfully sued her school, arguing that their actions violated her First Amendment rights.
“There was so much empowerment [in the decision to fight back],” Stylz explains. But also a lot of shame that Stylz says she “didn’t need to own” at just 17. After working through her shame, and anger, today she’s allowed her experience to inform her work as a trans rights advocate.
Stories like Stylz’ still resonate nearly three decades later because the right for trans individuals to live authentically is still under attack. Right now, politicians across the country have proposed — and in some states passed — anti-trans laws that attempt to restrict access to gender-affirming care, deny people their right to self expression, bar young people from playing sports and much more. These powerful politicians use their public platforms to spread anti-trans rhetoric that is discriminatory, often false and, most alarmingly, that endangers trans lives.
As the alleged “war on woke” attempts to manipulate trans rights into flashpoints in the larger political discourse, the truth remains unchanged: Attacks on trans rights is an attack on people — their lives, their rights and their freedom to be. These partisan attempts to police bodies so they might adhere to one person’s belief system is not just wrong, it's unlawful.
The ACLU and our partners have spent more than 100 years defending our First Amendment right to live authentically and our 14th Amendment right to be free from unconstitutional discrimination. Our work has not changed despite new attacks based on decade’s old prejudice. But this fight isn’t won just in the courthouse or Congress, it’s won — and led — by the trans community.
Trans individuals, like Stylz, who risk their health to take a stand for their rights have won freedoms for their community for more than 40 years. Most notably, Marsha P. Johnson, the Black trans woman and activist who led the Stonewall uprising in New York City in 1969, helped to establish a nationwide movement for trans rights that fought police brutality. In particular, trans women of color, like Stylz and Johnson, or Imara Jones or Sylvia Riviera, face an outsized risk in their efforts to live authentically, battling both gender and racial discrimination, while fighting for their rights.
In addition to race, age can also exacerbate anti-trans discrimination. New has found that trans and nonbinary teens report devastating interruptions in medically-necessary health care when politicians attempt to ban gender-affirming care. Groups like the Trans Youth Emergency Project, part of the Campaign for Southern Equality, work to help young people access the resources they need to live authentically no matter what laws exist in their state. For some, this could mean acquiring a chest binder to help heal gender dysphoria. For others, the Project helps young people living in states that have banned or restricted gender-affirming care to travel to find a provider or healthcare center that can support them.
The Trans Youth Emergency Project is but one way that the trans community has built its own safety net. While for Lizette and Jose Trujillo, whose son Daniel is trans, building safety within their own home has been vital to Daniel’s ability to thrive. The family lives in Arizona, which has advanced a series of . Lizette and Jose believe that parents should have the right to consent to and access medically necessary care for their child, including gender affirming medical care.
Daniel Trujillo (seated center) along with his parents, Lizette (standing, white t-shirt) and Jose (standing, black shirt) and the rest of his family.
“It was my responsibility to do whatever I needed to do to make the world safer for Daniel,” Lizette explains. “My child should have the right to access medical care that is private, medically necessary, and improves his quality of life without government intervention.”
The Trujillo family joins trans individuals across the country who are fighting for their freedom to be. The ACLU recently spotlighted their stories as a part of our ongoing efforts to showcase how, since people existed, the right to live authentically has been both vital and vulnerable. In addition to supporting trans individuals as they tell their stories, this December the ACLU, the ACLU of Tennessee, and our legal partners will argue before the Supreme Court for the right to gender-affirming care for trans minors in Tennessee. The case, US v. Skrmetti, is the first challenge to a ban on gender-affirming care to reach the Supreme Court.
“The well-being of countless transgender youth in this and future generations rests on this court adhering to the facts, the Constitution, and its own precedent both recent and long-standing,” explains Chase Strangio, co-director of the ACLU’s LGBTQ & HIV Project.
Strangio, who is leading the litigation, explains what has been true since Stylz’ First Amendment challenge in 1999 and since the Stonewall uprising in 1969, which is that trans individuals “will not find safety or justice in the courts alone. Our national culture still encounters trans people as a question to be answered or a problem to be solved.”
The trans experience is not defined solely by the people who seek to erase them, but by the ongoing fight for freedom and moments of true liberation. Twenty-four years after Stylz fought for the right to wear a dress to prom, Lizette and Jose watched their trans son Daniel don a suit and bowtie to attend the first trans prom, organized by trans teens for trans teens.
For Daniel and Stylz, and so many trans teens, prom is but one battle in the never ending fight for their rights. A battle we must all wage.
We must make “this world a safe place for us all and a free place for us all,” Stylz says. “Pursuing liberty and happiness is at the cornerstone of our Constitution. If you're not a part of that. You are part of the problem.”
Learn More About the Issues on This Page
-
Press ReleaseDec 2024
LGBTQ Rights
President Biden Must Veto Defense Bill Attacking Military Families with Transgender YouthPresident Biden Must Veto Defense Bill Attacking Military Families with Transgender Youth
WASHINGTON — The U.S. Senate today passed a version of the National Defense Authorization Act that would ban coverage for gender-affirming care for transgender youth whose parents are active-duty military personnel. The American Civil Liberties Union is opposing final passage of the defense bill over the inclusion of this health care ban and calling on President Joe Biden to veto the bill. Section 708 of the NDAA would prohibit insurance coverage for “medical interventions for the treatment of gender dysphoria” such as hormone therapy and puberty-suppressant medications, which Speaker Mike Johnson says would “permanently ban transgender medical treatment for minors.” The same treatments would be covered by TRICARE for any medical purpose other than treating gender dysphoria, the clinical diagnosis for the psychological distress experienced by transgender people related to their gender identity. “By passing this bill, the House and Senate are forcing thousands of active-duty service members to choose between their careers in the military and the future of their transgender children,” said Mike Zamore, national director of policy & government affairs at the ACLU. “This unconscionable and unjustifiable attack on those families stands in direct contrast to President Joe Biden’s legacy of defending the civil rights of transgender Americans — including when few in his own party showed the courage to do so. President Biden should cement his legacy by vetoing this bill and sending it back to Congress to pass without Speaker Johnson’s last minute health care ban for servicemembers’ kids.” If signed by President Biden, this health care ban would be the first new anti-LGBTQ provision enacted by Congress and signed into law by the president since the enactment of the military’s since-repealed “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy for LGBTQ servicemembers and the since-repealed federal law barring recognition of same-sex marriages known as the Defense of Marriage Act. It is unknown how many transgender youth are currently enrolled in TRICARE or how many of those enrolled are currently receiving coverage for gender-affirming care. In one 2022 analysis, 2,500 minor patients sought care for gender dysphoria through TRICARE Prime insurance at military or civilian treatment facilities in 2017, and 900 received puberty suppressants or gender-affirming hormones. Earlier this month, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in a landmark case brought by the ACLU, the ACLU of Tennessee, Lambda Legal, and Akin Gump on behalf of three families and a medical provider challenging a Tennessee ban on gender-affirming hormonal therapies for transgender youth on the grounds the ban violates the Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution. -
Press ReleaseDec 2024
LGBTQ Rights
Montana Court Blocks State From Refusing to Correct Sex Markers on Transgender People's Birth Certificates and Driver's LicensesMontana Court Blocks State From Refusing to Correct Sex Markers on Transgender People's Birth Certificates and Driver's Licenses
HELENA, Mont. – A Montana court has granted a preliminary injunction preventing the state of Montana from enforcing policies that bar transgender people from obtaining accurate sex designations on their birth certificates and driver’s licenses. After a prior restriction on amendments of birth certificates was struck down by the courts, in early 2024 the state of Montana enacted a new rule that categorically bars transgender Montanans from correcting the sex designation on their birth certificates. Around the same time, the Montana Department of Justice adopted a policy similarly restricting amendment of driver’s licenses. The plaintiffs challenged these policies in state district court, arguing that they violate various constitutional provisions, including the right to equal protection of the law. In a recent Montana Supreme Court decision, two justices concluded that discrimination on the basis of transgender status – as the state is engaging in here – is a form of sex discrimination that violates the Montana Constitution’s equal protection clause. The plaintiffs, two transgender women, are represented by the American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU of Montana, and Nixon Peabody LLP. Plaintiff Jessica Kalarchik, a veteran who served in the United States Army for 31 years, said: “After finally being able to live my life openly as the woman I know myself to be, I am frustrated that my birth state, Montana, wants me to carry around a birth certificate that incorrectly lists my sex as male. I live my life openly as a woman, I am treated as a woman in my daily life, and there is no reason I should be forced to carry a birth certificate that incorrectly identifies me as male. Fortunately, the court agrees that this ridiculous policy should not be in effect.” “Once again the State of Montana chose to adopt a draconian policy that is clearly intended to marginalize transgender Montanans, only for that discriminatory action to be blocked by the courts,” said Akilah Deernose, executive director for the ACLU of Montana. “Here in Montana we treasure our right to privacy and to live our lives free from governmental intrusion. The State of Montana clearly has not learned any lessons from the past few years, where courts have repeatedly struck down unconstitutional laws targeting transgender Montanans.” “Forcing anyone to carry documents that contradict their identity unjustly violates their rights to privacy, equal treatment, and not being compelled to convey a government message about their sex that they disagree with,” said Malita Picasso, staff attorney for the ACLU’s LGBTQ & HIV Project. “Such a policy marks transgender people for further mistreatment and discrimination, essentially requiring them to carry papers that out them as transgender any time they need to provide identity documents. Fortunately, the court has refused to allow the state of Montana to subvert the freedom of transgender Montanans to control their own identity as this case goes forward.” In granting the plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction, the court held, “[i]f the challenged state actions discriminate against transgender individuals on the basis of their transgender status, they also necessarily discriminate the basis of sex.” The state has the option of appealing the district court’s ruling to the Montana Supreme Court, but the underlying case will proceed in district court. A trial has not yet been scheduled. -
FloridaDec 2024
LGBTQ Rights
Keohane v. DixonKeohane v. Dixon
On September 30, 2024, the Florida Department of Corrections rescinded its policy regarding treatment of gender dysphoria, which allowed for hormone therapy when deemed medically necessary, as well as access to clothing and grooming standards that accord with one’s gender identity. Under this new policy, grooming and clothing accommodations have been stripped away, and hormone therapy is not permitted unless an exception is deemed constitutionally required. The ACLU brought a class action challenging the policy. -
IdahoDec 2024
LGBTQ Rights
Robinson v. LabradorRobinson v. Labrador
Two incarcerated transgender women have sued the state of Idaho alleging that HB 688, a 2024 law barring state funding for gender-affirming medical care for transgender people, denies them access to the health care their doctors have prescribed for them and is a violation of their Eighth Amendment right to be free from cruel and unusual punishment. They represent a class of all incarcerated folks within the state of Idaho who face the loss of hormone therapy due to HB 668.