红杏视频

BOSTON 鈥� The 红杏视频, the 红杏视频 of Massachusetts, and Covington & Burling LLC filed motions for class certification and preliminary classwide relief today in their lawsuit challenging the State Department鈥檚 refusal to issue passports with accurate sex designations for trans, intersex, and nonbinary American citizens. The new filing follows a federal court ruling finding that an executive order by President Trump and the passport policy implementing that order are likely unconstitutional and unlawful. The court鈥檚 preliminary injunction requires the State Department to issue updated passports to six transgender and nonbinary people who are named plaintiffs in the lawsuit. The new filings ask the court to certify a class of people adversely affected by the State Department policy and to extend this relief nationwide to the entire class so that other transgender, intersex, and nonbinary people can receive accurate passports. 鈥淭he court鈥檚 finding that this policy is likely unconstitutional and unlawful holds just as true for our class members as it does for our plaintiffs, and we are asking the court to expand its preliminary injunction to protect the rights of all transgender, intersex, and nonbinary people,鈥� said Li Nowlin-Sohl, Senior Staff Attorney at the 红杏视频 LGBTQ & HIV Project. 鈥淏y forcing people to carry documents that directly contradict their identities, the Trump administration is attacking the very foundations of the right to privacy and the freedom to be ourselves,鈥� said Jessie Rossman, Legal Director at 红杏视频 of Massachusetts. 鈥淚t is important that every person has the ability to live and travel safely, and we will continue to fight to rescind this unlawful policy to make sure that this relief extends to everyone.鈥� On his first day in office in January 2025, Trump signed an executive order attempting to mandate discrimination against transgender people across the federal government and government programs. This included a directive to the Departments of State and Homeland Security 鈥渢o require that government-issued identification documents, including passports, visas, and Global Entry cards鈥� reflect their sex 鈥渁t conception.鈥� Under the ensuing passport policy, the State Department began refusing to issue new, renewed, or changed passports with a sex designation other than what the State Department believed to be their sex assigned at birth regardless of the sex designation applied for. Over 214,000 public comments in opposition to the State Department鈥檚 new policy were collected by the 红杏视频 and Advocates for Transgender Equality. In February 2025, the 红杏视频, the 红杏视频 of Massachusetts, and Covington and Burling LLP filed the Orr v. Trump class action complaint on behalf of seven people who have not been able to obtain passports that match who they are because of the State Department鈥檚 new passport policy or who are likely to be impacted by the new policy upon their next renewal. The complaint was filed in the federal District Court for the District of Massachusetts. An amended complaint was filed on April 25, adding five named plaintiffs seeking to represent the class along with the seven plaintiffs named in the original complaint.

WASHINGTON, D.C. 鈥� Today, as leaders in the U.S. House and Senate are set to reintroduce the Equality Act 鈥� historic federal legislation that would ensure comprehensive nondiscrimination protections for LGBTQ+ people everywhere 鈥� a coalition of civil rights organizations urgently calls for the legislation鈥檚 swift passage. The bill鈥檚 reintroduction comes amidst a dangerous rise in anti-LGBTQ+ legislative and executive actions, including the erosion of nondiscrimination protections and weaponization of federal authorities against marginalized communities. The coalition includes: Advocates for Transgender Equality, 红杏视频, Equality Federation, Family Equality, GLAD, GLSEN, the Human Rights Campaign, NBJC, National Center for Lesbian Rights, National LGBTQ Task Force Action Fund, National Women鈥檚 Law Center and PFLAG. The groups issued the following statement: 鈥淓very LGBTQ+ person deserves the freedom to be themselves and to thrive. That鈥檚 why we鈥檙e calling on Congress/federal lawmakers to ensure equality for everyone, no matter who we love or our gender identity. Anti-equality politicians have worked to crater the health, education, housing, financial, workplace safety and public accommodations laws that protect all of us. These harmful efforts have meant that in 2025, LGBTQ+ people can be denied a loan, an apartment, or access to public facilities simply because of who they are. And now, the Trump-Vance administration has weaponized the Executive Branch against every marginalized community, taking aim at all of our civil rights and freedoms. 鈥淭hese attacks challenge the bedrock laws protecting our universal freedoms, but they cannot strip us of our collective power. Our communities, our states and our nation are stronger because each of us across race, place and gender brings our history, our culture, our experience and our know-how to make us strong. That is why passing the Equality Act is so necessary in this moment. The bill is more than a lifeline for those in danger of losing necessary protections; it ensures all people in this country鈥擝lack, white or brown, Native or newcomer, queer or straight, transgender or not鈥攃an live freely without constant fear of discrimination or retaliation. The Equality Act is a declaration that the United States continues to fight for freedom for all. 鈥淎cross areas of life, this bill would safeguard people from discrimination and ensure we all have the chance to chase our American Dream. Congress should pass the Equality Act and send a message to the country that we all deserve to live authentically and have the opportunity to thrive.鈥� The nonpartisan Public Religion Research Institute (PRRI) found that national support for the Equality Act topped 75 percent, including a majority of Republicans and Independents. The Equality Act has also garnered support from businesses and over 650 organizations, including civil rights, education, health care, and faith-based groups. The Equality Act was reintroduced today by Congressman Mark Takano and Senators Jeff Merkley, Tammy Baldwin and Cory Booker. The Equality Act: Consistent and Explicit Protections for LGBTQ+ People The sharp rise in anti-LGBTQ+ measures has led to a dizzying patchwork of fragmented and discriminatory laws, creating hostile environments and inconsistent protections for LGBTQ+ people. With nearly two-thirds of LGBTQ+ people reporting facing discrimination in their daily lives, the Equality Act would establish consistent federal non-discrimination protections in critical areas such as housing, credit, education, public spaces and services, federally funded programs, and jury service. This legislation is essential to ensure universal safeguards against discrimination. Without federal protections, LGBTQ+ individuals across the United States face significant vulnerabilities, such as eviction, denial of services, unfair surcharges, or refusal of healthcare and loans, simply due to their identity. The Equality Act seeks to address these inequities by providing consistent anti-discrimination protections nationwide. It ensures that LGBTQ+ individuals can live without fear of harassment or discrimination, while also expanding essential protections for women, people of color, and individuals of all faiths. The Equality Act also extends crucial protections from discrimination based on sex, race, and religion. The Equality Act also extends protections to millions on the basis of sex 鈥� who aren鈥檛 covered by some existing federal anti-discrimination laws 鈥� to ensure they don鈥檛 have to live in fear of harassment or discrimination. In addition, it modernizes public accommodations law to provide increased protections from discrimination on the basis of race and religion. It would ensure that women cannot be charged more than men by a dry cleaner for cleaning a shirt, or that those who breastfeed are not harassed or excluded from public spaces, or that women aren鈥檛 turned away from a pharmacy refusing to fill a birth control prescription. It would ensure that taxis and car-sharing services cannot refuse service to Black people, and that stores can鈥檛 refuse entrance to people of color. It would ensure that an accountant agency cannot refuse to work for someone because they disagree with their religion. Anti-LGBTQ+ Attacks Have Continued to Escalate, Underscoring the Need for the Equality Act Since inauguration, the Trump Administration has signed a raft of anti-LGBTQ+ executive actions aimed at restricting the rights and freedoms of LGBTQ+ people. These actions include efforts to: Restrict access to health care for transgender people of all ages Restrict transgender youth from participating in sports Censor classrooms and punish inclusive and welcoming schools for their support of LGBTQ+ youth Rollback nondiscrimination protections in health care settings and others Restrict access to accurate federal identity documents for transgender and nonbinary people, and more These anti-LGBTQ+ executive actions build on a yearslong campaign by state legislatures and anti-equality governors to weaken protections for LGBTQ+ people and assail equality nationwide. Transgender, non-binary, and gender non-conforming youth in particular have been directly impacted by anti-LGBTQ+ legislation, losing access to life-saving medical care, comprehensive and inclusive education, and activities, spaces, and facilities. Gender affirming care bans (26 states) 鈥� nearly 40 percent of all transgender youth age 13-17 are living in states where they can no longer access life-saving, best practices medical care. In more than a dozen states, restrictions on care have implications for adults as well, especially through bans on public funds going to provide this best practice healthcare and restrictions on which medical professionals are authorized to prescribe such care. More than 30 states introduced gender affirming care bans during the 2023 legislative session, meaning that at its height, half of all transgender youth in the U.S. were at risk of losing access to gender-affirming care. Anti-Transgender sports bans (26 states) 鈥� prohibit trans youth from participating in sports alongside their friends. These bills affect large swaths of trans youth as young as middle school (with some states even extending restrictions down to kindergarten). Bathroom bans (18 states) and 12 states with laws that restrict trans youth from using facilities in school consistent with their gender identity and 4 states with laws restricting trans people from using public bathrooms. In recent months, the scope of state legislative attacks has continued to widen. Last month, Iowa became the first state to remove existing statewide nondiscrimination protections from a community when Governor Kim Reynolds signed the law eliminating 鈥済ender identity鈥� as a protected class in the Iowa Civil Rights Act. In addition, numerous states, including Idaho, North Dakota, and Michigan, have seen anti-equality politicians put forward resolutions calling for the United States Supreme Court to overturn their marriage equality ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges. The time to act is now. The reintroduction of the Equality Act marks a critical moment for our country to reaffirm its foundational promise: that freedom, dignity, and equal opportunity are guaranteed for all. Amid a wave of escalating attacks and system rollbacks, Congress has the chance鈥揳nd the responsibility鈥搕o rise to this moment and deliver real, lasting protections for LGBTQ+ people and all who face discrimination.

BOSTON 鈥� A federal judge issued a preliminary injunction today after finding that an executive order by President Trump and a State Department policy prohibiting updates to sex designations on passports is likely unconstitutional and in violation of the law. The preliminary injunction requires the State Department to allow six transgender and nonbinary people to obtain passports with sex designations consistent with their gender identity while the lawsuit proceeds. Though today鈥檚 court order applies only to six of the plaintiffs in the case, the plaintiffs plan to quickly file a motion asking the court to certify a class of people affected by the State Department policy and to extend the preliminary injunction to that entire class. 鈥淭his decision is a critical victory against discrimination and for equal justice under the law,鈥� said Li Nowlin-Sohl, Senior Staff Attorney for the 红杏视频鈥檚 LGBTQ & HIV Project. 鈥淏ut it鈥檚 also a historic win in the fight against this administration鈥檚 efforts to drive transgender people out of public life. The State Department鈥檚 policy is a baseless barrier for transgender and intersex Americans and denies them the dignity we all deserve. We will do everything we can to ensure this order is extended to everyone affected by the administration鈥檚 misguided and unconstitutional policy so that we all have the freedom to be ourselves.鈥� 鈥淭his ruling affirms the inherent dignity of our clients, acknowledging the immediate and profound negative impact that the Trump administration's passport policy would have on their ability to travel for work, school, and family,鈥� said Jessie Rossman, Legal Director at 红杏视频 of Massachusetts. 鈥淏y forcing people to carry documents that directly contradict their identities, the Trump administration is attacking the very foundations of our right to privacy and the freedom to be ourselves. We will continue to fight to rescind this unlawful policy for everyone so that no one is placed in this untenable and unsafe position.鈥� On his first day in office in January 2025, Trump signed an executive order attempting to mandate discrimination against transgender people across the federal government and government programs. This included a directive to the Departments of State and Homeland Security 鈥渢o require that government-issued identification documents, including passports, visas, and Global Entry cards鈥� reflect their sex 鈥渁t conception.鈥� Under the ensuing Passport Policy, within 48 hours the State Department began holding some passports and other documents (such as birth certificates and court orders) submitted by transgender, intersex, and nonbinary people who had applied to update the sex designation on their U.S. passports and returning others with their applications rejected and their newly-issued passport marked with their sex assigned at birth. Over 214,000 public comments in opposition to the State Department鈥檚 new policy were collected by the 红杏视频 and Advocates for Transgender Equality. In February 2025, Orr v. Trump was filed by the 红杏视频, the 红杏视频 of Massachusetts, and Covington and Burling LLP, on behalf of seven people who have not been able to obtain passports that match who they are because of the State Department鈥檚 new Passport Policy or are likely to be impacted by the new policy upon their next renewal. The complaint was filed in the federal District Court for the District of Massachusetts.

Whether the Department of Defense Education Activity can remove educational material related to race and gender from its libraries and classrooms in K-12 schools.