Tracking Federal Developments

Updated as of June 6, 2025

Since Inauguration Day, we’ve seen many of the cruel attacks targeting the rights and freedoms of LGBTQ+ Americans–especially transgender Americans–that we anticipated from the Trump Administration and its implementation of Project 2025. Their move fast and break things approach is overwhelming by design, and it’s clear they have no concern for the law or the devastating consequences their policies will inflict on everyday Americans.

We’re tracking federal developments and strengthening our resistance by leveraging every opportunity to push back. In Florida, we’ve been living under a MAGA supermajority for years, and have fought back against similar anti-LGBTQ laws and policies. We understand how to resist, claw back important protections, and connect our community with vital resources. Below are some of the federal actions we’re monitoring that impact our community and ways to join us in the fight.

Executive Orders

In the first days of his Administration, Trump signed a slew of executive orders that directly target LGBTQ+ Americans. While the impacts are wide-ranging, executive orders do not override constitutional protections, established legal precedent, or federal law, and usually require federal agencies to issue rules or guidance to implement an order’s directives. These processes take time and may offer additional opportunities for public engagement and pushback during agency rulemaking, so stay tuned for more information on ways to take action. The anti-LGBTQ impacts of several executive orders and status of legal challenges are described below.

Redefining Sex to Increase Discrimination Against Transgender People

Trump issued a Day One executive order that made it the policy of the federal government to recognize only two sexes, defined as sex assigned at birth, and refuse to accept that people transition or that nonbinary and intersex people exist. This order attempts to end the legal recognition of transgender Americans across federal agencies, which could increase discrimination in education, employment, healthcare, and housing, and includes additional directives to agencies to:

• Prohibit access to accurate identity documents issued by the federal government that affirm an applicant’s gender identity, including Passports, Visas, and Global Entry Cards;

• Prohibit trans people from accessing restrooms on federal property–like in government offices, military bases, and national parks–that align with how they live their lives;

• Force transgender people entangled in the federal corrections system to be classified according to their sex at birth–transferring transwomen to men’s facilities–and prohibiting access to gender-affirming care or accommodations;

• Halt all federal funding for anything related to a vague and offensive definition of “gender ideology”;

• Rescind all previously issued federal guidance related to LGBTQ-inclusive practices.

Many lawsuits challenging various provisions of this executive order have been filed in court.

In Orr v. Trump, the ACLU sued Trump and his Department of State over their anti-trans passport policy, and, in April, received a preliminary injunction that requires updated passports to be reissued to the lawsuit’s named plaintiffs that reflect their gender identity. The ACLU then asked the court to extend the preliminary injunction to all trans, intersex, and nonbinary people seeking accurate and affirming passports, which was argued on May 27 and is currently under review.

In March, through multiple cases–Moe v. Trump, Doe v. Bondi, and Jones v. Bondi–brought by GLAD Law and NCLR, federal judges temporarily blocked Trump’s attempts to force incarcerated trans women to be housed in men’s prisons. In a separate case– Kingdom v. Trump–, a federal court issued a preliminary injunction in June that temporarily blocks Trump’s directive to prohibit incarcerated trans people from accessing necessary transition-related medical care and social accommodations, like clothing.

And in May, a new class action complaint challenging the order’s anti-trans restroom ban on federal property was filed with the National Guard Bureau Equal Opportunity Office on behalf of a civilian employee of the Illinois National Guard, and is currently under review.

Restricting Access to Gender Affirming Care

Through multiple executive orders, the Trump Administration has attacked the validity of gender-affirming care and the concept of transitioning itself, swapping all previously published guidance in support of gender-affirming care, including patient standards of care, for explicitly anti-trans materials. Trump directed federal agencies to restrict access to lifesaving care for transgender young people, by excluding coverage for care from federal health insurance policies and Affordable Care Act plans, and withholding federal funding from hospitals and other medical providers that provide gender-affirming care to people under 19.

The ACLU and Lambda Legal sued the Administration, and in March, won a preliminary injunction in PFLAG v. Trump, prohibiting the federal government from withholding or terminating federal funding if a medical facility or provider delivers gender-affirming care to patients under 19. For more information, visit PFLAG’s FAQs.

Transgender Military Ban

On January 20, Trump issued a complete ban on transgender people serving in the military, which was swiftly implemented by the Department of Defense, and disqualified anyone who has gender dysphoria or has received transition-related care from enlisting, barring new recruits and forcing thousands of highly trained troops actively protecting our country to be discharged.

Several lawsuits challenging Trump’s military ban have been filed. After winning a nationwide preliminary injunction in March that blocked the ban, the US Supreme Court granted the Administration’s request to put the injunction on hold in May, allowing the ban to take effect while the legal challenges proceed. For additional information, visit Lambda Legal and HRC’s Shilling v. Trump page and GLAD Law and NCLR’s Talbot v. Trump page.

Transgender Youth Sports Ban

On February 5, Trump issued an executive order that categorically bans transgender girls from participating on school sports teams that align with their gender identity and threatens to rescind federal funding from any school that fails to comply. Multiple lawsuits have been filed in response, including Tirrell and Turmelle v. Edelblut on behalf of two teen girls from New Hampshire, and are currently under review.

Sweeping Attacks on Diversity, Equity & Inclusion

In January, Trump issued two executive orders targeting diversity, equity, and inclusion in the federal government. The first requires the Office of Budget Management to end all government policies, programs, preferences, and activities related to DEI or accessibility; the other requires federal agencies to terminate all grants, contracts, and other operations related to DEI initiatives, empowers the Attorney General to find ways to eliminate DEI from the private sector, and threatens to withhold federal funding from educational institutions that fail to comply.

Multiple lawsuits–including National Association of Diversity Officers in Higher Education v. Trump, filed by Democracy Forward–were filed against both executive orders. Although a federal court issued a nationwide preliminary injunction in February that prohibited enforcement of key provisions of these orders, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals issued a stay to lift the lower court’s injunction in March and has allowed both orders to go into effect while the case proceeds on appeal.

Increasing School Censorship

On January 29, Trump issued an executive order that seeks to export Florida’s “Don’t Say Gay” and “Stop WOKE” laws to K-12 schools nationwide by attempting to dictate to students, parents, and educators what books, conversations, and social supports are acceptable in classrooms, censoring honest history and inclusive curricula, threatening teachers who affirm LGBTQ+ students with criminal penalties, and eliminating federal funding for schools that don’t comply. In April, students sued the federal government over its school censorship policies, and the case is currently under review.

Codifying DOGE Cuts to Reshape Government Agencies

Supplementing attacks from Trump’s executive orders, we’ve seen widespread efforts from the Administration and DOGE to gut sources of federal funding, fire thousands of government employees, and completely shut down federal agencies, like the Department of Education.

Many of these actions impact discretionary funding that was already approved and dispersed by Congress, and will require formal implementation through the “recission” process because the President lacks the authority to make unilateral decisions about federal funding. On May 28, Trump sent his rescission package request to the relevant Congressional committees to facilitate $9 billion in federal cuts. The rescission process is governed by federal law, and requires Congress to approve requests within 45 days through a simple majority vote in each branch.

Since January, Trump has relentlessly attacked and defunded programs at every level of government that work to treat and prevent HIV, hampering detection and intervention, derailing livesaving medical advancements, and jeopardizing efforts worldwide to end the epidemic. Under Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., the Department of Health & Human Services has canceled hundreds of federal HIV research grants, shut down critical vaccine trials, fired thousands of scientific staff, and eliminated entire programs and offices dedicated to treatment and prevention. Federal budget cuts targeting health programs that reference LGBTQ+ people, equity, or diversity have further constrained the ability of Florida’s medical institutions and community-based health programs to continue research and deliver care.

Although we’ve seen major pushbacks to these actions nationwide, now that the rescission process is formally underway, we must keep the pressure on Congress to oppose the package’s massive cuts to education, public health, and global aid. Call your Members of Congress in the US House and Senate today to urge them to reject funding cuts that undermine these critical government programs and services.

FY 2025 Budget Reconciliation Bill

On May 22, the US House of Representatives passed a Budget Reconciliation Bill that implements Trump’s tax cuts for the rich and fuels deportations, by taking healthcare and food assistance away from millions of Americans. In a last ditch effort to appease extremists, Republicans amended the bill overnight to include discriminatory exclusions on transition-related healthcare coverage for trans people of all ages. The House’s version of the bill prohibits Medicaid and Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) coverage for gender-affirming care, and removes transition-related services from the list of “Essential Health Benefits” that Affordable Care Act plans are required to cover. These changes would reduce access to livesaving medical care that is supported by every major medical institution nationwide, allowing bias, instead of science, to determine who can receive what type of care. The bill also jeopardizes reproductive healthcare nationwide by banning Medicaid funding for Planned Parenthood. And its deep Medicaid cuts threaten progress on ending the HIV epidemic, as more than 40% of adults with HIV rely on Medicaid coverage for care, with many more depending on coverage for access to the critical HIV prevention medication, PrEP.

Even though every Democratic member of the US House–including Florida’s Democratic delegation–voted no on the bill, it still moved to the Senate, where it will only need 51 votes to pass, instead of the regular 60. Although we expect significant changes to be made by the Senate, Republicans want to send this bill to Trump before July 4, so we need to keep the pressure up in both branches.

FY 2026 Budget

While most of the anti-LGBTQ attacks we’ve seen since January have originated from Trump’s executive orders and federal agency cuts, we know that extreme Republicans have used the budget negotiation process before to sneak in discriminatory anti-LGBTQ policies. Last year, with sustained opposition and outreach, we ensured that not a single anti-LGBTQ policy rider—of more than 50 proposed to the FY25 budget—was approved. While we don’t yet know exactly what type of anti-LGBTQ policy attacks might be proposed in the FY26 budget, we are prepared to fight back alongside our communities and partners.

In addition to anticipated anti-LGBTQ policy riders, Trump’s newly released budget proposal contains serious cuts that will jeopardize the health and wellness of LGBTQ+ Americans nationwide. The proposal slashes more than $1.5 billion in critical HIV-related funding, which experts estimate could lead to 143,000 new infections and 14,700 HIV-related deaths in the US within 5 years and over $60 billion in avoidable healthcare costs. It would also eliminate all funding for the Department of Health and Human Service’s Suicide & Crisis Lifeline’s LGBTQ+ Youth Specialized Services, a federal program that provides emergency crisis support to LGBTQ+ youth.

We’ll continue monitoring FY26 budget negotiations, so stay tuned for additional ways to take action.

Landmark Supreme Court Decisions

Several landmark legal challenges to anti-LGBTQ actions, laws, and policies have made their way to the Supreme Court in recent years, and this month, we’re expecting decisions that could impact the fight for LGBTQ+ equality nationwide. The Court’s decision in US v. Skrmetti–a challenge to Tennessee’s ban on gender-affirming care for youth brought by the ACLU and Lambda Legal–will determine what kind of legal review gender identity based discrimination should receive, and, potentially, whether state laws banning gender-affirming care for youth are unconstitutional.

The stakes are also clear in Kennedy v. Braidwood, in which discriminatory religious beliefs about HIV prevention medication could undermine access to a wide range of essential health services–including cancer screenings, heart disease treatments, and other preventative care measures–that are currently required to be covered by health insurance plans at no cost to patients under the Affordable Care Act.

And in Mahmoud v. Taylor, school book bans could drastically expand nationwide, as the Court decides whether the inclusion of LGBTQ+ books in public schools that don’t provide a notice-and-opt-out option violates religious freedom protections for parents.

Decisions in these cases are expected in the next few weeks, and will shape the future fight for equality nationwide. And while we don’t know how the Court will rule, we do know that we will continue to fight for the rights of Floridians to receive the care they need and access inclusive education, free from discrimination. Stay tuned for more information about what the Supreme Court’s decisions mean for Floridians, and make plans today to join Equality Florida at St. Pete Pride’s Trans March on Saturday, June 28 to find resistance in community and affirm that trans rights are human rights, no matter what the Supreme Court decides.

Standalone Anti-LGBTQ Bills

As harmful policies are reviewed by the courts and continue to move through the Executive Branch and budget processes, an early test of Congress has buoyed hope that standalone anti-LGBTQ bills do not have the momentum to pass both branches of this Congress, despite Republican majority control.

After passing the US House of Representatives in January, H.R. 28, a federal trans sports ban that would withhold federal funding from schools nationwide with inclusive athletics policies and violate the safety and privacy of all girls, failed to pass the US Senate.

We will continue to monitor legislative developments in Congress, and we must all continue to reach out to lawmakers to defend our trans family, friends, and neighbors from harmful attacks by the Trump Administration and extremist Republicans.