As the reality of President-elect Donald Trump’s victory begins to settle, LGBTQ+ rights groups and individuals are grappling with the realities of what that means—especially now that he has a GOP-majority Senate to back him on his policies.
Throughout his campaign, Trump showcased an anti-trans rhetoric across his speeches, ads, and written platform policies. One of his advertisements stated that his Democratic opponent, Vice President Kamala Harris, is for “they/them—not you.”
Republicans spent nearly $215 million on anti-trans ads this election cycle, according to data released by Ad Impact. Trump’s inflammatory words against LGBTQ+ Americans—most notably aimed at trans persons—is not new. In his first term as President, Trump put forth several policies that attempted to repeal protections for LGBTQ+ Americans.
Now that he has won a second term, LGBTQ+ Americans are wondering what policies are most likely to affect their rights once he returns to the White House in January.
On Trump’s official website, he outlines a 20-point platform, his roadmap to “Make America Great Again,” called Agenda 47. There, he states his priorities to roll back LGBTQ+ rights, including his plans to “keep men out of women’s sports”—targeting the small number of trans women who choose to join teams that match their gender identity—and “cut federal funding for any school pushing…radical gender ideology.” Beyond that, through his speeches, Trump has laid out his plans to roll back particular President Joe Biden-era discrimination laws and enact new laws targeting especially trans individuals.
TIME has reached out to the Trump campaign about its proposed policies and how they might impact the LGBTQ+ community.
Katie Eyer, a professor at Rutgers Law School, emphasizes that Trump’s presidency could lead to more conservative court appointments, and thus difference in how courts interpret cases on the federal level. So, while appeals courts have often been ruling in favor of transgender people fighting discrimination, this may change during a Trump presidency.
“Constitutional law is the backdrop to discriminatory laws,” Eyer tells TIME. “But of course, if you have a court that is unwilling to enforce equality rights vis-à-vis LGBT people, then that backdrop stops being a meaningful one.”
Here are three key areas in which Trump’s presidency could impact LGBTQ+ rights.
A ban on transgender persons in the military
During Trump’s first term in office, he formally instructed the Department of Defense to reverse a 2016 order allowing transgender individuals to serve openly in the military, something he blamed on the cost of gender-affirming surgeries. The policy immediately triggered a slew of lawsuits against the Administration.
The Biden Administration overturned this order in 2021, but experts like Eyer believe that a reinstatement is very likely to happen early on in Trump’s presidency, and a similar slew of lawsuits are bound to follow.
Health care restrictions
In the past few years, there have been a number of state-led initiatives to ban gender-affirming care for transgender and gender nonconforming minors. In August, the Human Rights Campaign reported there were 26 states with a ban or policy against gender-affirming care for minors and that 39% of transgender youth lived in states that have passed bans on gender-affirming care.
Trump has expressed that his Administration would follow the lead of these states, and attempt to halt gender-affirming medical care for adolescents nationwide, particularly by threatening to deny federal funding for hospitals that provide this care. This would make it incredibly hard for youth with gender dysphoria to access what many doctors and psychiatrists consider life-saving care.
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has already brought multiple cases to court, challenging these state law bans, and in their press release regarding Trump’s potential plans for LGBTQ+ issues, they have stated they will “continue to litigate this issue in courts across the country should a second Trump Administration further restrict this care.”
According to Tara McKay, co-founder and Director of the Vanderbilt LGBTQ+ Policy Lab, this could also just heighten the issue and lead to more bans on the state level, especially since much health care and policy is decided and implemented by the state level, despite being partially federally funded.
“States have control over health care, so if [Trump] pursues a full federal ban [on gender-affirming care for minors], your progressive states will immediately challenge it, and it will be in court,” McKay says. “I think very similar to the abortion landscape, we will end up with states that are mobilizing protections and states that are becoming incredibly hostile and life threatening for folks who are targeted.” California Governor Gavin Newsom has already called a special session, which he has confirmed is in part due to a desire to protect the LGBTQ+ community upon the news of Trump’s victory.
Trump’s plans will also significantly depend on the outcome of Tennessee’s ban on gender transition care for minors—United States v. Skrmetti—which is about to be decided by the Supreme Court. The ruling could establish a larger precedent not only on transgender medical care but also on broader issues of civil rights, including access to public facilities and participation in sports.
McKay also emphasizes another aspect of health care that is already being affected by Trump’s upcoming return to power: LGBTQ+ mental health. She points to new research in her lab, showing that exposure to negative news and media coverage on LGBTQ+ people and policies increases suicidal ideation among LGBTQ+ teens and young adults. Since the election was called in the early hours of Nov. 6, the Trevor Project has also reported a 700% increase in call volume to its crisis hotline.
According to Imara Jones, an American political journalist and transgender activist, the main question in relation to transgender health is “how are people going to stand up?”
“Are states like New York, states like California, going to push back against some of the administrative rules that are changing?” she says. “How much do groups that say they are trans allies actually stand up and support? How are trans people going to work to form community and form support for people who are going to be hardest hit by these laws?”
Dismantle Title IX protections, education standards, and identification options
Trump has specifically latched onto language against trans women competing in sports. During a rally in Virginia on Nov. 2, Trump said he will “of course keep men out of women’s sports.” His Agenda 47 also states that he will ask Congress to interpret Title IX as prohibiting trans women from participating in women’s sports. He already worked to rollback Title IX protections for LGBTQ+ students in his first term in office.
Biden worked during his term to expand Title IX protections to LGBTQ+ youth, reforming changes from Trump’s first term that narrowed the scope of the 1972 law but sidestepped issues regarding transgender athletes. He has said that on “day one” of his presidency he plans to reverse these Title IX protections. If Trump were to rollback Biden’s expansions which did protect transgender students, he would not need Congress to do so.
According to Simone Chriss, a civil rights attorney and the Director of Transgender Rights Initiative at Southern Legal Counsel, the fear here is not just about transgender athletes, but rather restrictive Title IX definitions of sex and gender that could affect large portions of the LGBTQ+ community.
“I think the overarching goal is redefining sex across the board in a way that excludes transgender people,” Chriss says. “And we’re seeing states like Florida redefine sex for purposes of our entire K-20 education code to make sex determined by, you know, reproductive function.”
This dovetails with Trump’s plans referenced to shift funding for schools based on how they teach about gender identity and sexual orientation. In a filmed address in January 2023, Trump vowed to “cut federal funding” to schools that discuss “gender ideology.”
For Chriss, one of the major fears is that Trump could follow Florida’s lead in redefining sex, and that this could affect transgender people’s abilities to access identification services that allow them to utilize their correct gender.
Earlier this year, a memo from the Florida Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles shared that Florida residents would no longer be allowed to change the listed gender on their driver’s licenses or state ID. If this is expanded federally to passports, Chriss says the ramifications could be devastating for the transgender community.
“Lack of access to identification documents that reflect who you are is something that impacts every interaction a person has, and ability to get employment and housing and all these things,” she says. “Every transgender client I have, if they don’t have a passport, or if their passport still says the wrong gender marker or name, I’m like, ‘Update it as fast as you can, because we have till January.’”
