Tag Archives: politics

US Supreme Court agrees to decide on state bans on conversion therapy for LGBTQ+ children

The Supreme Court agreed to decide on the constitutionality of state and local governments’ ban on conversion therapy in a case from Colorado on Monday. Conversion therapy refers to the effort used to convert someone’s gender identity and sexual orientation. The ban on conversion therapy has been argued by the Court of Appeals to be harmful, unsafe, and ineffective health treatment.

Kaley Chiles, a counselor, filed the case at issue. She argues that the law violates her First Amendment rights to free speech and freely exercise her religion. At The Court of Appeal, the justices reasoned that the law was enacted to regulate the health care profession and conduct of therapists rather than their speech. They state that the court’s precedent makes it clear that “the First Amendment does not relieve professional health care providers from their responsibility to provide treatment consistent with their fields’ standards of care.” Moreover, The Court of Appeal determined that “the First Amendment permits states to regulate the professional practice of conversion therapy.”

The Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser, in opposition to the case, stated that:

In Colorado, we are committed to protecting professional standards of care so that no one suffers unscientific and harmful so-called gay conversion therapy. Colorado’s judgment on this is the humane, smart, and appropriate policy and we’re committed to defending it,

Ultimately, by the Supreme Court approving the petition to hear this case, the court will have the opportunity to make a binding precedent that will impact the laws surrounding free speech in America and fundamentally impact the lives of LGBTQ+ American children.

Since his election, President Trump has repeatedly targeted the LGBTQ+ community. He issued an executive order directing federal agencies to restrict access to gender-affirming medical care for transgender youth under age 19 and block federal funding for such treatments. The Human Rights Campaign (HRC) and Lambda Legal filed a lawsuit against Trump after he signed an executive order to ban transgender people from serving in the US Armed Forces.

The post US Supreme Court agrees to decide on state bans on conversion therapy for LGBTQ+ children appeared first on JURIST – News.

Russia Supreme Court upholds 12-year imprisonment of transgender anti-war activist

Leave a reply

Russia Supreme Court upholds 12-year imprisonment of transgender anti-war activist

Russian Supreme Court upheld the 12-year imprisonment of a transgender anti-war activist Mark Kislitsyn, stated Amnesty International on Wednesday. The group said convicting the activist of high treason for sending US $10 to a Ukrainian bank account “defied common sense,” urging his immediate release.

Natalia Prilutskaya, Amnesty International’s Russia researcher, reiterated that the real aim of Kislitsyn’s persecution, imprisonment and ill-treatment in detention was not to protect state security, but to “punish a committed human rights defender for his anti-war stance.”

Mark Kislitsyn is a transgender man, anti-war and LGBT activist. He was convicted for transferring $10 to a Ukrainian bank account, which the authorities alleged that the account was opened to raise funds for the Ukrainian army to fight Russia after the “special military operation” against Ukraine.

The Russian authorities regarded Kislitsyn’s actions as high treason under Article 275 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. The article provides that “rendering financial assistance to a foreign state in activities against the security of the Russian Federation” amounts to high treason. The court sentenced Kislitsin in December 2023 to 12 years in a general regime colony with a fine of 200 thousand rubles (approximately $2,300).

The group also contended that Kislitsyn faced ill-treatment after being detained, in particular the denial of gender-affirming hormonal treatment. Kislitsyn is also facing prolonged and unjustified confinement in a punishment cell, predominantly in solitary confinement.

Solitary confinement is regulated by international law. According to Rule 45 of the UN Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners, “solitary confinement shall be used only in exceptional cases as a last resort, for as short a time as possible and subject to independent review.”

In a letter written from jail, Mark Kislitsyn said, “Those who are trying to intimidate me… can do me a little harm, but no matter what they do, they cannot make me renounce my beliefs, lose my sense of belonging to my country or even ruin my mood.”

In order to eliminate criticism of the government’s actions, Russia has been using strict laws to regulate the information landscape since the start of the full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022. Restrictive laws used for suppression of opposition, besides the well-known law on “foreign agents,” include some articles of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, such as article 207.3 which prohibits the “public dissemination of knowingly false information about the use of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation.” Article 280.3 also prohibits “discrediting the armed forces of the Russian Federation.”

The post Russia Supreme Court upholds 12-year imprisonment of transgender anti-war activist appeared first on JURIST – News.

Japan high court declares denial of same-sex marriage unconstitutional

Leave a reply

Japan high court declares denial of same-sex marriage unconstitutional

Japan’s Nagoya High Court ruled on Friday that the country’s lack of legal recognition for same-sex marriage is unconstitutional. This ruling marks the fourth consecutive high court decision to declare the current government policy unconstitutional following similar verdicts in Tokyo, Fukuoka, and Sapporo.

The appellants argued that the current provisions of Japan’s Civil Code and Family Registration Act, which do not recognize same-sex marriage, violate Article 14, Paragraph 1, and Article 24, Paragraph 2 of the Japanese Constitution. The appellants also sought damages of 1 million yen in accordance with Article 1, Paragraph 1 of the State Redress Act, as they were unable to marry due to the government’s failure to take necessary legislative action.

In its ruling in favor of the appellants, the court stated that same-sex relationships have existed naturally even before legal marriage, and that the societal acknowledgment of such personal relationships as legitimate is a vital legal interest tied to personal dignity, extending beyond specific legal frameworks for marriage and family.

Additionally, the court held that same-sex couples face disadvantages in various aspects of social life that cannot be resolved through civil partnership systems. These include housing-related disadvantages, such as restrictions on renting properties; financial institutions refusing to recognize same-sex partners as family members for mortgage applications; and disadvantages in accessing products and services designed for family relationships. However, the court said that although the relevant provisions are unconstitutional, the government’s failure to make legislative changes is not illegal under the State Redress Act.

This large-scale class action lawsuit, dubbed “Freedom of Marriage for All,” involves more than 30 plaintiffs and around 80 lawyers, with six lawsuits filed in five courts nationwide. This is the first class action lawsuit for same-sex marriage, as Japan remains the only Group of Seven (G7) country that has yet to legalize same-sex marriage, despite persistent lobbying from the LGBT community and its supporters.

The post Japan high court declares denial of same-sex marriage unconstitutional appeared first on JURIST – News.

Ghana lawmakers reintroduce anti-LGBTQ+ bill imposing harsh restrictions

Leave a reply

Ghana lawmakers reintroduce anti-LGBTQ+ bill imposing harsh restrictions

Lawmakers in Ghana reintroduced the Human Sexual Rights and Family Values Bill, a controversial and incredibly restrictive piece of anti-LGBTQ+ legislation, to Parliament on Tuesday.

Presently, in Ghana, gay sex is punishable by up to three years in prison. The bill is seeking to impose harsher penalties for engaging in consensual same-sex conduct by increasing the maximum penalty up to five years. Additionally, criminalizing the “funding or sponsorship for prohibited activities” and “advocacy, support” and promotion for LGBTQ+ rights or organizations, the bill imposes a term of imprisonment between five to ten years.

Introduced in 2021 as the Promotion of Proper Human Sexual Rights and Ghanian Family Values Bill, Ghana’s parliament passed the bill on February 28, 2024. However, former President Nana Akufo-Addo declined to sign the bill into law prior to the end of his term. The former president cited legal challenges as having prompted this delay, noting his intention to wait for the Supreme Court’s decision. Cases challenging the bill were eventually dismissed in December as the presidential assent was required to review them. Nana Akufo-Addo’s term ended in January 2025, resulting in the bill expiring without enactment.

President John Mahama expressed support for the bill during the Fellowship with the Clergy event on February 28, 2025, declaring, “I, as a Christian, uphold the principle and the values that only two genders exist, man and woman, that a marriage is between a man and a woman.” Referring to a conversation with the speaker of Parliament, Mahama asserted, “The renewal of the expired Proper Family Values Bill should be a bill that is introduced by government rather than as a private members motion, and it’s my hope that that consultation would see a renewed Proper Family Values Bill.”

In an interview with Citi News on February 27, 2025, Reverend John Ntim Fordjour, opposition party MP, confirmed the bill had been resubmitted, calling upon President John Mahama to provide presidential assent for its passing. Ten lawmakers sponsored its reintroduction, including MPs Samuel Nartey George and Emmanuel Kwasi Bedzrah from the National Democratic Congress, Ghana’s ruling party.

NGOs and advocacy groups such as LGBT+ Rights Ghana have expressed their concern for the impact on the LGBTQ+ community, admonishing the bill’s reintroduction as being “pushed by homophobic politicians and religious groups as means to promote oppression against Queer people in Ghana.” After its passing last year, Human Rights Watch researcher Larissa Kojoué stated, “The anti-LGBT rights bill is inconsistent with Ghana’s longstanding tradition of peace, tolerance, and hospitality and flies in the face of the country’s international human rights obligations.” She further noted, “Such a law would not only further erode the rule of law in Ghana, but could also lead to further gratuitous violence against LGBT people and their allies.”

The post Ghana lawmakers reintroduce anti-LGBTQ+ bill imposing harsh restrictions appeared first on JURIST – News.

USA: Iowa governor signs bill striking gender identity from state civil rights law

Leave a reply

USA: Iowa governor signs bill striking gender identity from state civil rights law

Iowa Governor Kim Reynolds on Friday signed into law a bill that removes gender identity as a protected class under Iowa civil rights law.

Reynolds emphasized that the state’s “Civil Rights Code blurred the biological lines between the sexes” in an unacceptable manner and that the new law will strengthen the state’s efforts to protect women and girls.

The governor stated:

[A]cknowledg[ing] the obvious biological differences between men and women … is necessary to secure genuine equal protection for women and girls. It is why we have men and women’s bathrooms, but not men and women’s conference rooms; girls’ and boys’ sports, but not girls’ math and boys’ math; separate men and women’s prisons, but not different laws for men and women. It is about the biological differences, and that is all.

The classes commonly protected under Iowa civil rights law are “race, creed, color, sex, sexual orientation, national origin, religion, or disability.” Iowa law prohibits discrimination against protected classes in schooling, housing, real estate, loaning, and employment practices.

The new law, however, changes the statutory construction of terms relating to sex and gender, stating that an individual’s sex is to be construed as being “either [biologically] male or female as observed or clinically verified at birth.” Gender is to be construed as synonymous to sex and not as a shorthand for “gender identity, experienced gender, gender expression, or gender role.” Additionally, “woman” and “girl” are to be construed as referring to a female, and “man” and “boy” are to be construed as referring to a male.

The law further provides that exceptions to sex discrimination are allowed “in prisons or other detention facilities, domestic violence shelters, rape crisis centers, locker rooms, restrooms, and in other contexts where health, safety, or privacy are implicated resulting in separate accommodations” because they “are substantially related to … important government objectives.”

The law also prohibits teaching “gender theory” in public and charter schools. It defines gender theory to include:

The concept that an individual who experiences distress or discomfort with the individual’s sex should identify as and live consistent with the individual’s internal sense of gender, and that an individual can delay natural puberty and develop sex characteristics of the opposite sex through the use of puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones, and surgical procedures.

Prior to its passage, ACLU of Iowa Executive Director Mark Stringer called the bill “barbaric.” He elaborated that gender identity has been protected under Iowa civil rights law for almost two decades. He stated:

If Gov. Kim Reynolds signs this bill, Iowa will become the first state in the country to repeal protections for LGBTQ people from its state civil rights law. Iowa has been a trailblazer in advancing civil and basic human rights—from banning slavery all the way to ensuring marriage equality. In many instances, our laws have helped advance the causes of freedom and equality in our nation. It is shocking to think that Iowa may now become another first—the first to specifically single out transgender people for removal of their legal rights as enshrined in state antidiscrimination law.

The post Iowa governor signs bill striking gender identity from state civil rights law appeared first on JURIST – News.

USA: Trump signs executive order aimed at banning transgender athletes from women’s sports

Leave a reply

USA: Trump signs executive order aimed at banning transgender athletes from women’s sports

President Trump signed an executive order Wednesday aimed at keeping transgender women out of women’s sports by rescinding all funds from educational programs that allow transgender women to compete in women’s categories or to use women’s changing rooms.

Trump stated that the goal of this executive order is to “protect opportunities for women and girls to compete in safe and fair sports,” citing Title IX of the Education Amendments Act of 1972 and several Federal court cases including, Kansas v. U.S. Dept. of Education and Tennessee v. Cardona. Title IX states that, “No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from the participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.” This provision has brought the definition of “sex” to the forefront, as debated in both federal court cases in Kansas and Tennessee. Trump used these cases to highlight his interpretation of “Congress’ goal of protecting biological women in education.”

Some athletes celebrated the executive order, including Riley Gaines, Kaitlynn Wheeler, and Danica Patrick. Kaitlynn Wheeler stated, “this is a victory for every girl who has fought for fairness, every woman who refused to be silenced and every future athlete who deserves a level playing field.”

Trans athletes claim that the order will have detrimental effect on the trans community, including Karleigh Webb, who said, “this is part of a whole program to essentially erase transgender Americans from American life.” There are concerns that the policy will have the effect of excluding transgender women from participating in sports, with opponents claiming the policy is discriminatory.

Charlie Baker, the National Collegiate Athletic Association (the “NCAA”) President, released a statement addressing the executive order:

The NCAA Board of Governors is reviewing the executive order and will take necessary steps to align NCAA policy in the coming days, subject to further guidance from the administration. The Association will continue to help foster welcoming environments on campuses for all student-athletes.

With the Olympics headed to Los Angeles in 2028, there is debate over whether trans athletes will be able to compete. The International Olympic Committee has allowed transgender athletes to participate at the Olympics since 2004, but the first trans athletes to compete were in 2021. Trump has made it clear he intends to challenge the Olympic Committee on this policy moving forward.

The post Trump signs executive order aimed at banning transgender athletes from women’s sports appeared first on JURIST – News.

Tunisia intensifies crackdown on LGBTI individuals: Amnesty International

Leave a reply

Tunisia intensifies crackdown on LGBTI individuals: Amnesty International

Amnesty International denounced Tunisian authorities’ increased arrests of LGBTI individuals on Thursday. The organization reported that at least 84 individuals, mostly gay men and transgender women, have been arrested since September 2024.

The wave of arrests began after a homophobic and transphobic online campaign gained traction. Many individuals involved in the campaign were supporters of Tunisian President Kais Said. President Said has historically supported the criminalization of homosexuality.

The majority of arrests were based on Article 230 of Tunisia’s Penal Code, which criminalizes “sodomy and lesbianism.” Additionally, Article 226 of the Penal Code prohibits acts that are “against good morals or public morality.” Tunisian authorities have deemed displays of non-conforming gender identity to fall under these provisions.

Arrestees have been subjected to mistreatment while in custody. Men accused of participating in same-sex relations must undergo anal examinations to test for evidence of penetration. Amnesty International considers these forced examinations to be a form of torture. According to the UN Convention Against Torture, “torture” means any official act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person to obtain information from him or for a reason based on discrimination.

Amnesty International reported that LGBTI activists have also been subject to arrest in Tunisia. Mira Ben Salah, who is a part of the LGBTI activist group Damj Association for Justice and Equality, stated that she has been repeatedly harassed by authorities due to her work. Ben Salah has filed complaints with the Public Prosecutor at the country’s Court of First Instance but told Amnesty International that the investigation has not progressed.

Amnesty International has consistently monitored the human rights situation in Tunisia. The organization’s Secretary General reported an alarming rollback of human rights protections after a visit to Tunisia in July 2024. Amnesty International now calls for Tunisian authorities to immediately release arrested LGBTI individuals.

Even though there are no international conventions with a view to eliminating discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender, the UN considers Article 1 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights as the source of state obligations to respect the human rights of LGBTI persons.

Relatedly in January 2024, Human Rights Watch called on Meta to protect LGBTQ+ people by preventing Middle Eastern countries’ security forces, including Tunisia, from using their data to prosecute sexual minorities.

The post Tunisia intensifies crackdown on LGBTI individuals: Amnesty International appeared first on JURIST – News.

ECtHR: Judgment Klimova and Others v. Russia (State action for “promoting homosexuality among minors” violates freedom of expression)

Leave a reply

ECtHR: Judgment Klimova and Others v. Russia (nos. 33421/16, 8156/20, 32416/20, 39855/20, 10497/21, 33277/21, and 46226/21) (State action for “promoting homosexuality among minors” violates freedom of expression)

The applicants are six Russian nationals who were born on various dates between 1973 and 2000. They are the owner of a website and administrators of websites or social networking groups and communities, such as http://www.gay.ru, one of the oldest and largest LGBTI websites in Russia, and an online project “Children-404. LGBT teenagers” (Дети-404. ЛГБТ-подростки). The websites and VKontakte a social networking platform communities and groups owned or administered by the applicants sought to encourage tolerance and acceptance of LGBTI people, to give support to troubled LGBTI teenagers, to provide information on, and a forum for discussion of, LGBTI-related topics or to provide a space where LGBTI people could meet to find friends or romantic partners.
The case concerns the applicants’ convictions for an administrative offence and/or the blocking of access to their websites or webpages on social networking sites for “promoting homosexuality among minors”. Legislation introduced in Russia from 2003 to 2013 made the “promotion of non-traditional sexual relationships” among minors an offence punishable by a fine (see Bayev and Others v. Russia, applications nos. 67667/09, 44092/12 and 56717/12). The Russian courts notably found that the applicants’ publications on the Internet were harmful for children.

Relying on Article 10 (freedom of expression), the applicants complain that the legislative ban on promoting homosexuality among minors as applied in their specific cases breached their freedom of expression. One of the applicants, Yuliya Vladimirovna Tsvetkova (no. 39855/20), also complains that the security services collected user data from VKontakte related to her personal social networking account and to the social networking commuity administered by her. She relies on Article 8 (right to
respect for private and family life).

Violation of Article 8 in application no. 39855/20
Violation of Article 10 in applications nos. 33421/16, 8156/20, 32416/20, 10497/21, 33277/21, and 46226/21

Just satisfaction: For the details of the amounts awarded to the applicants for non-pecuniary damage, as well as for costs and expenses, please see the operative part the judgment

More: https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=001-241568

USA: Trump administration rescinds sweeping federal funding freeze after court challenge (Ending Radical and Wasteful Government DEI Programs and Preferencing)

Leave a reply

USA: Trump administration rescinds sweeping federal funding freeze after court challenge (Ending Radical and Wasteful Government DEI Programs and Preferencing)

The Administration of US President Donald Trump on Wednesday rescinded a directive to freeze funding across federal agencies just one day after announcing the sweeping measure, which had left agencies and beneficiaries scrambling to determine its impact.

Tuesday’s directive mandated a temporary pause on all federal financial assistance disbursements and obligations, including grants and loans, while agencies reviewed their programs for alignment with new Trump administration priorities. During this pause, agencies were required to halt new funding programs, stop disbursements under existing programs, and pause activities related to open funding opportunities, though certain legally mandated actions could continue with OMB approval.

The order was issued by way of a memo from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), an executive-branch office responsible for managing the presidential budget and oversight of agency spending. In the memo, OMB Acting Director Matthew Vaeth criticized federal spending under the previous Democratic administration of Joe Biden as the “use of Federal resources to advance Marxist equity, transgenderism, and green new deal social engineering policies” and as a “waste of taxpayer dollars that does not improve the day-to-day lives of those we serve.”

But the directive lacked specificity that would help agencies and beneficiaries understand which programs might be eligible for exceptions, fueling anxiety about the breadth and scope of the order, including fears that programs critical for providing food and resources to the nation’s most vulnerable populations would suffer as a consequence of the order.

The order was supposed to take effect on Tuesday evening, Eastern US time, but a federal district judge granted an administrative stay, pausing the freeze for several days. The stay was granted in response to a lawsuit filed by the National Council of Nonprofits, which said in a statement: “This reckless action by the administration would be catastrophic for nonprofit organizations and the people and communities they serve. … From pausing research on cures for childhood cancer to halting housing and food assistance, shuttering domestic violence and homeless shelters, and closing suicide hotlines, the impact of even a short pause in funding could be devastating and cost lives. This order must be halted immediately before such avoidable harm is done.” The judge said the administrative stay would block the OMB from enforcing the directive pending arguments to take place next week.

Confusion continued to mount in the meantime, with questions about the freeze dominating a White House press briefing on Wednesday. During the briefing, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said repeatedly that the order would not affect direct beneficiaries of federal programs, but was less clear on indirect individual beneficiaries, such as seniors benefiting from federally funded nutrition programs organized by third-parties. She maintained more information was coming.

Shortly thereafter, reports emerged that the OMB had released a brief memo rescinding its directive from Tuesday. Leavitt took to X (formerly Twitter) to confirm that the OMB memo had been rescinded because of the court order. She added the caveat, however, that Trump’s various executive orders on federal funding “remain in full force and effect, and will be rigorously implemented.” The executive orders named in the OMB memo included the following:

Protecting the American People Against Invasion (Jan. 20, 2025), which revoked several Biden-era immigration policies while directing federal agencies to prioritize deportations, establish nationwide Homeland Security Task Forces, expand detention facilities, encourage state-local immigration enforcement partnerships, and review funding to NGOs that assist undocumented immigrants;
Reevaluating and Realigning United States Foreign Aid (Jan. 20, 2025), which imposed a 90-day pause on US foreign development assistance disbursements while agencies review all foreign aid programs for alignment with the Trump administration’s foreign policy objectives, with the Secretary of State empowered to grant waivers and approve resumption of funding for programs that pass review;
Putting America First in International Environmental Agreements (Jan. 20, 2025), which directed the US’ immediate withdrawal from the Paris Agreement on climate change and all related UN climate accords, revokes the US International Climate Finance Plan, and requires federal agencies to prioritize economic efficiency and American prosperity over climate commitments in international energy agreements;
Unleashing American Energy (Jan. 20, 2025), which mandated a comprehensive review and rollback of climate-related policies, including revoking multiple Biden-era executive orders, pausing Inflation Reduction Act funding disbursements, disbanding the interagency working group on carbon costs, expediting energy permits, restarting LNG export reviews, and directing agencies to prioritize domestic energy production and mineral development while removing restrictions on consumer choice in vehicles and appliances;
Ending Radical and Wasteful Government DEI Programs and Preferencing (Jan. 20, 2025), which mandated the termination of all federal Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) and Environmental Justice programs and positions, required agencies to document all such programs and contractors since January 2021, and established monthly meetings to monitor the elimination of these initiatives across the federal government;
Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government (Jan. 20, 2025), which defined sex as binary and biological, mandated federal agencies to use only these definitions, required identification documents to reflect biological sex rather than gender identity, prohibited federal funding related to “gender ideology,” directed changes to prison housing policies based on biological sex, and rescinded multiple Biden-era policies and guidance documents related to gender identity protections; and
Enforcing the Hyde Amendment (Jan. 24, 2025). which revoked two Biden-era orders related to abortion access and directed the OMB to issue guidance ensuring federal funding complies with the Hyde Amendment’s restrictions on using federal funds for elective abortions.

The post Trump administration rescinds sweeping federal funding freeze after court challenge appeared first on JURIST – News.

USA: Trump restricts access to gender-affirming treatment for transgender youth

Leave a reply

USA: Trump restricts access to gender-affirming treatment for transgender youth

US President Donald Trump issued an executive order on Tuesday directing federal agencies to restrict access to gender-affirming medical care for transgender youth under age 19 and block federal funding for such treatments.

The order requires federal health programs to exclude coverage for gender-affirming surgeries and hormone treatments for minors beginning in 2026. Key provisions include directing the Department of Health and Human Services to review and rescind its 2022 guidance on gender-affirming care; requiring medical institutions receiving federal research grants to halt providing these treatments to minors; instructing the Justice Department to prioritize investigations into potential consumer fraud related to long-term effects of these treatments; and calling for new protections for employees wishing to report on noncompliance by their colleagues.

The order also directs HHS to conduct a literature review on treatment options for transgender minors — which it refers to as “children who assert gender dysphoria, rapid-onset gender dysphoria, or other identity-based confusion” — within 90 days and tasks the Justice Department with working with Congress on legislation to create a private right of action for affected individuals.

Implementation timelines vary by agency, with initial progress reports due within 60 days.

The executive order comes amid an ongoing national debate over transgender rights and healthcare access. According to the Human Rights Campaign, transgender Americans face significant barriers to healthcare, with 22% lacking health insurance coverage and 29% reporting being denied care by medical providers due to their gender identity. Transgender youth in particular face heightened challenges – research indicates that many identify across a broad spectrum of gender identities, and have historically struggled to access appropriate medical care and support services. While public support for transgender rights grew from 25% to 62% between 2014 and 2019, transgender Americans continue to face disproportionate rates of poverty, discrimination in housing and employment, and difficulty obtaining accurate identity documents that match their gender identity.

The issues of gender-affirming care and treatment options for transgender youth featured prominently in the 2024 election season, with Trump-aligned Republicans largely disavowing the necessity of such care.

The post Trump restricts access to gender-affirming treatment for transgender youth appeared first on JURIST – News.