News
Activists worry that Trump will bulldoze trans rights. Here's how they're preparing
Supporters of transgender rights hold signs as they rally outside the Supreme Court on Wednesday in Washington, D.C., as arguments begin in a case regarding a Tennessee law banning gender-affirming medical care for transgender youth.
Drew Angerer/Getty Images
hide caption
toggle caption
Drew Angerer/Getty Images
Afraid. Disappointed. Frustrated.
This is how Giovanni Santiago is feeling after former President Donald Trump’s reelection victory.
“What I do believe is that LGBTQ people, specifically trans people, are a target for him, and are a target for his fan base,” Santiago, who is trans, says about the president-elect.
The 38-year-old lives in Ohio, where state law has banned gender-affirming care for youths and participation of transgender girls and women on girls and women’s sports teams. He is seeing and feeling the impacts of the political fight over rights for transgender people every day.
Nationally, the issue of gender-affirming care for minors was before the Supreme Court this week, after families challenged Tennessee’s ban.
Santiago, a local activist in Cleveland, isn’t alone in how he feels.
Giovanni Santiago, a transgender rights advocate who lives in Ohio, is preparing for a tough four years under a second Trump administration.
GROUND Media/GROUND Media
hide caption
toggle caption
GROUND Media/GROUND Media
“Many in our community, particularly trans people and their families, are filled with anxiety and fear about what a second Trump presidency could bring,” says Ash Lazarus Orr, with Advocates for Trans Equality. The group works to strengthen and protect the rights of transgender people through policy advocacy, political work and legal support.
Restricting access to gender-affirming care for minors and barring trans women from women’s sports teams covered by Title IX are just some of the policies that Trump’s campaign has said will be under consideration once he is in office.
Local advocates, trans people and their families, as well as national LGBTQ organizations are preparing for these potential Trump administration actions.
“We know that the next four years [are] going to be a grind,” Santiago says.
That means the work — on both policy and personal levels — is just beginning, Santiago and others tell NPR.
Trans-rights activists protest outside the House chamber at the Oklahoma Capitol in Oklahoma City before the 2023 State of the State address.
Sue Ogrocki/AP
hide caption
toggle caption
Sue Ogrocki/AP
The political climate ushering in Trump
Republicans ramped up anti-trans messaging in the 2024 campaign. According to a report by AdImpact shared with NPR, the Republican Party spent $222 million on anti-trans ads during the campaign; overall ad spending by the party totaled $993 million.
Topics like gender-affirming care and trans women in sports have galvanized many American voters, says Andrew Proctor, an assistant instructional professor of political science who teaches courses on lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender politics at the University of Chicago.
Recent polling shows that 76% of Americans say they support nondiscrimination laws for LGBTQ communities.
And, yet, on the issue of transgender athletes, polling also indicates that a large majority of Americans, around 70%, say they should be allowed to compete only on teams that match their sex assigned at birth.
Trump returns to the White House at a time when half of all U.S. states ban transgender people under 18 from receiving gender-affirming health care. And 26 states have restrictions on transgender students participating in sports consistent with their gender identity, according to Movement Advancement Project, a nonprofit think tank that tracks LGBTQ-related laws.
The new Trump administration will likely look at what states have accomplished and use that as a playbook for what could be achieved legislatively at the federal level, Proctor says.
But the big question for Proctor is how high of a priority trans issues will be on the Trump agenda.
“They’re polarizing issues, and they do galvanize particular bases of the Republican Party,” he says.
That also was the case for anti-abortion policies, Proctor says, and yet Republicans were unable to pass legislation when they had control of the federal government under former President George W. Bush and for a time during Trump’s first term. “So it’s not clear if this issue will pan out any differently,” he says.
Roe v. Wade, which guaranteed the right to abortion, was eventually overturned by the U.S. Supreme Court in 2022.
Since the presidential election, one Republican, Rep. Nancy Mace of South Carolina, has introduced legislation that appears to single out newly elected Rep. Sarah McBride of Delaware, the first transgender lawmaker to serve in the U.S. Congress.
If passed, the bill would ban transgender women from using bathrooms and locker rooms on federal property that do not correspond with the sex they were assigned at birth.
Prepping for policies under Trump
Demonstrators gather near the steps to the Texas Capitol to speak against transgender-related legislation bills being considered in the Texas Senate and House in 2021, in Austin, Texas.
Eric Gay/AP/AP
hide caption
toggle caption
Eric Gay/AP/AP
Groups including the American Civil Liberties Union, Transgender Law Center and others are gearing up to combat Trump policies on trans Americans in the courts.
It’s a battle they’re familiar with.
During his first term, Trump attempted to ban transgender Americans from serving in the military and from receiving gender-affirming health care through the military. This effort faced legal challenges and was eventually overturned by President Biden’s administration.
When asked about the possibility of a ban on transgender people serving in the military during a second Trump administration, Trump-Vance transition team spokeswoman Karoline Leavitt told NPR that “no decisions” have been made on the issue. The transition team did not respond to other questions from NPR, including those about gender-affirming care for trans youths.
Another proposal during Trump’s first term — which intended to strip “sex discrimination” protections for trans people from health care laws — was challenged in court by a coalition of LGBTQ clinics and organizations. That was successfully blocked in court.
And at least 17 states are facing lawsuits challenging their laws and policies limiting youth access to gender-affirming care.
“Litigation will be essential, but it will not be enough,” Sruti Swaminathan, a staff attorney with the ACLU, said during a recent GLAAD media call. “We will engage on every advocacy front, including mobilizing and organizing our network of millions of ACLU members and activists in every state to work to protect LGBTQ people from the dangerous policies of a second Trump administration.”
Winning hearts and minds
Proctor says the electoral success of anti-trans messaging will embolden certain factions of the Republican Party. “We should expect that the anti-trans rhetoric is going to intensify,” he says.
Activists like Santiago and another Ohio resident, Rick Colby, say a major part of their work for the next four years will be pushing back against that anti-trans rhetoric.
Colby, 64, describes himself as a conservative Republican. He also has a son named Ashton who is trans. Colby, who lives in Columbus, Ohio, is in an unusual position: He voted for Trump, but plans to spend the next four years working with his 32-year-old son to fight anti-trans policies. He says he is happy the Republican Party will be in control of the federal government, but also very concerned about the party’s stance on trans issues, which he says “is awful.”
Rick Colby of Columbus, Ohio, right, and his son Ashton work as advocates on trans issues across the nation. Colby says their work will continue during the Trump administration.
Ashton Colby/Rick Colby
hide caption
toggle caption
Ashton Colby/Rick Colby
“Talking is where the education comes in,” Santiago says during a separate conversation with NPR. He is the founder of META Center Inc., a group that offers direct support to transgender and gender-nonconforming people online and in person.
Over the next few months, he says he will be partnering with several organizations to provide training and plans to participate in panel discussions about the state of being transgender in America — and Ohio specifically.
He plans to meet people “where they are” — in libraries, in town halls or over email — to share information about trans people and dispel incorrect, preconceived notions about LGBTQ communities. A conversation between people on different sides of an issue can lead to a meeting in the middle and even common ground, he says.
Take gender-affirming care for youths. Major medical groups in the U.S. — including the American Academy of Pediatrics and the American Medical Association — support access to gender-affirming care for youth with gender dysphoria, the discomfort or psychological distress caused when one’s sex assigned at birth and one’s gender identity are different. That care can range from using a child’s preferred pronouns to using puberty-blocking medications and sex hormones.
But, Santiago says, many people don’t know the facts about the issue. Trump’s campaign website says that he plans to “revoke Joe Biden’s cruel policies on so-called ‘gender affirming care’—a process that includes giving kids puberty blockers, mutating their physical appearance, and ultimately performing surgery on minor children.”
As a result, Santigao says, there’s an incorrect belief, spread during the election and by Trump, that young children are undergoing gender-affirming surgery — which is actually a rare occurrence.
Similar to Santiago’s efforts, Colby and his son will continue what they’ve been doing for years: meeting lawmakers face-to-face and talking about their experiences. Their work has brought them to Capitol Hill before and he expects it will again.
“We’re just being human,” Colby says. “We try to demystify the issue and humanize it. They hear the narratives being pushed about all these left-wing parents pushing their kids into being transgender. And, of course, obviously, anybody would be concerned if that’s the only thing you’re hearing.”
There’s a segment of the GOP that, in his experience, offers openness and kindness on the issue.
“My son and I are just going to keep trying to reach that kind of undecided middle group of people,” he says.
What groups are doing now
Lazarus Orr from Advocates for Trans Equality says there are steps people can begin taking now. The group recommends trans people update documents, including driver’s licenses and passports, to reflect desired name or gender marker changes ahead of January.
Lazarus also encourages people not to let anxiety and fear control them.
“I think one of the bravest things that trans folks can do right now is just continue living,” he says. “More than ever, just the simple act of our existence is a form of resistance.”
Santiago says his work and life will continue even in the face of opposition.
GROUND Media
hide caption
toggle caption
GROUND Media
It’s advice Santiago, the Ohio activist, takes to heart. To counter his fear and stress, he finds moments of joy while watching football with his family (“Roll Tide, baby”), decorating for the holidays and proudly embracing his identity as a “Disney Adult.” He is not cowed by the opposition.
“I’m going to live my best life because at the end of the day what would make them happy is for me to stop doing that,” he says. “And I’m never going to give that satisfaction to anyone.”
President Trump announced a three-week extension of a cease-fire between Israel and Lebanon that had been set to expire in a few days, after hosting a meeting between Israeli and Lebanese diplomats at the White House on Thursday.
Hezbollah, the Iranian-backed militant group that has been attacking Israel from southern Lebanon, did not have representatives at the meeting and did not immediately comment on the announcement. The prime minister of Israel and the president of Lebanon also did not comment.
A successful peace agreement would hinge upon Hezbollah halting attacks, which Lebanon’s government has little power to enforce because it does not control the militia. Lebanon’s military has mostly stayed out of the fighting and is not at war with Israel.
The cease-fire, which was scheduled to end on April 26, would last until May 17 if it takes effect as Mr. Trump described it. Before the cease-fire was brokered last week, nearly 2,300 people were killed in Lebanon and 13 in Israel. Since then, the number of Israeli airstrikes and Hezbollah attacks have been dramatically reduced, though the two sides have continued exchanging fire.
The Lebanese Ambassador to the United States, Nada Hamadeh, credited Mr. Trump for extending the cease-fire, saying that “with your help and support, we can make Lebanon great again.” Mr. Trump replied, “I like that phrase, it’s a good phrase.”
Asked about the potential of a lasting peace agreement between Israel and Lebanon, Mr. Trump said that “I think there’s a great chance. They are friends about the same things and they are enemies on the same things.”
But Lebanon and Israel have periodically been at war since Israel’s founding in 1948. Israel has invaded Lebanon for the fifth time since 1978, incursions that have destabilized the country and the delicate balance of power between Muslim, Christian and Druze communities.
In the hours before the president’s announcement on social media, Israel and Hezbollah were trading attacks in southern Lebanon, testing the existing cease-fire.
Mr. Trump said the meeting at the White House had been attended by high-ranking U.S. officials, including Vice President JD Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio and the U.S. ambassadors to Israel and Lebanon.
Earlier on Thursday, an Israeli strike near the southern Lebanese city of Nabatieh killed three people, according to Lebanon’s health ministry. Hezbollah claimed three separate attacks on Israeli troops who are occupying southern Lebanon, though none were wounded or killed.
Hezbollah set off the latest round of fighting last month by attacking Israel soon after the start of the U.S.-Israeli bombing campaign in Iran. Israel responded to Hezbollah’s attacks by launching airstrikes across Lebanon and widening a ground invasion of the country’s south.
Smoke rises from Port of La Guaira in Venezuela on Jan. 3, 2026 after U.S. forces seized the country’s president, Nicolas Maduro and his wife.
Jesus Vargas/Getty Images
hide caption
toggle caption
Jesus Vargas/Getty Images
Federal prosecutors on Thursday unsealed an indictment against a U.S. Army soldier, accusing him of using his insider knowledge of the clandestine military operation to capture Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro in January to reap more than $400,000 in profits on the popular prediction market site Polymarket.
The Justice Department says Gannon Ken Van Dyke, 38, who was stationed at Fort Bragg, in North Carolina, was part of the team that planned and carried out the predawn raid in Caracas earlier this year that resulted in the apprehension of Maduro.
The Department of Justice and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission filed the actions against Van Dyke, the first time U.S. officials have leveled criminal charges against someone over prediction market wagers.
According to the indictment, Van Dyke now faces counts of wire fraud, commodities fraud, misusing non-public government information and other charges.
Trading under numerous usernames including “Burdensome-Mix,” Van Dyke allegedly traded about $32,000 on the arrest of Maduro, resulting in profits exceeding $400,000.
“Prediction markets are not a haven for using misappropriated confidential or classified information for personal gain,” said U.S. Attorney Jay Clayton for the Southern District of New York. “Those entrusted to safeguard our nation’s secrets have a duty to protect them and our armed service members, and not to use that information for personal financial gain.”
Van Dyke’s defense lawyer is not yet publicly known. Polymarket did not return a request for comment.
The charges against Van Dyke come at a sensitive time for the prediction market industry, which has been growing exponentially, despite calls in Washington and among state leaders for the sites to be reined in.
Van Dyke is the first to be charged in the U.S. for suspected Polymarket insider trading, but Israeli authorities in February arrested several people and charged two on suspicion of using classified information to place bets about military operations in Iran on Polymarket.
The Senate early Thursday morning adopted a Republican budget blueprint that would pave the way for a $70 billion increase for immigration enforcement and the eventual reopening of the Department of Homeland Security.
Republicans pushed through the plan on a nearly party-line vote of 50 to 48. It came after an overnight marathon of rapid-fire votes, known as a vote-a-rama, in which the G.O.P. beat back a series of Democratic proposals aimed at addressing the high cost of health care, housing, food and energy. The debate put the two parties’ dueling messages on vivid display six months before the midterm elections.
Republicans, who are using the budget plan to lay the groundwork to eventually push through a filibuster-proof bill providing a multiyear funding stream for President Trump’s immigration crackdown, used the all-night session to highlight their hard-line stance on border security, seeking to portray Democrats as unwilling to safeguard the country.
Democrats tried and failed to add a series of changes aimed at addressing cost-of-living issues, seizing the opportunity to hammer Republicans as out of touch with and unwilling to act on the concerns of everyday Americans.
Here’s what to know about the budget plan and the nocturnal ritual senators engaged in before adopting it.
Republicans are seeking a way around a filibuster on D.H.S. funding.
The budget blueprint is a crucial piece of Republicans’ plan to fund the Department of Homeland Security and end a shutdown that has lasted for more than two months. After Democrats refused to fund immigration enforcement without new restrictions on agents’ tactics and conduct, the G.O.P. struck a deal with them to pass a spending bill that would fund everything but ICE and the Border Patrol. Republicans said they would fund those agencies through a special budget bill that Democrats could not block.
“We can fix this with Republican votes, and we will,” said Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina and the Budget Committee chairman. “Every Democrat has opposed money for the Border Patrol and ICE at a time of great peril.”
In resorting to a new budget blueprint, Republicans laid the groundwork to deny Democrats a chance to stop the immigration enforcement funding. But they also submitted themselves to a vote-a-rama, in which any senator can propose unlimited changes to such a measure before it is adopted.
The budget measure now goes to the House, which must adopt it before lawmakers in both chambers can draft the legislation funding immigration enforcement. That bill will provide yet another opportunity for a vote-a-rama even closer to the November election.
Democrats used the moment to hammer Republicans on affordability.
Democrats took to the floor to criticize Republicans for supercharging funding for federal immigration enforcement rather than moving legislation that would address Americans’ concerns over affordability.
“This is what Republicans are fighting for,” said Senator Chuck Schumer, Democrat of New York and the Democratic leader. “To maintain two unchecked rogue agencies that are dreaded in all corners of this country instead of reducing your health care costs, your housing costs, your grocery costs, your gas costs.”
Democrats offered a host of amendments along those lines, all of which were defeated by Republicans — and that was the point. The proposals were meant to put the G.O.P. in a tough political spot, showcasing their opposition to helping Americans afford high living costs. Fewer than a handful of G.O.P. senators crossed party lines to support them.
Republicans blocked Democrats’ proposals to address high living costs.
The G.O.P. thwarted an effort by Mr. Schumer to require that the budget measure lower out-of-pocket health care costs for Americans. Two Republicans who are up for re-election this year, Senators Susan Collins of Maine and Dan Sullivan of Alaska, voted with Democrats, but the proposal was still defeated.
Republicans also squelched a move by Senator Ben Ray Lujan, Democrat of New Mexico, to create a fund that would lower grocery costs and reverse cuts to food aid programs that Republicans enacted last year. Ms. Collins and Mr. Sullivan again joined Democrats.
Also defeated by the G.O.P.: a proposal by Senator John Hickenlooper, Democrat of Colorado, to address rising consumer prices brought on by Mr. Trump’s tariffs and the war in Iran; one by Senator Edward J. Markey, Democrat of Massachusetts, to require the budget measure to address rising electricity prices, and another by Mr. Markey to create a fund to bring down housing costs.
Senator Jon Ossoff, a Democrat who is up for re-election in Georgia, also sought to add language requiring the budget plan to address health insurance companies denying or delaying access to care, but that, too was blocked by Republicans.
Republicans sought to amplify their hard-line messages on immigration, voter I.D. and transgender care.
While Republicans had fewer proposals for changes to their own budget plan, they also sought to offer measures that would underscore their aggressive stance on immigration enforcement and dare Democrats to vote against them.
Mr. Graham offered an amendment to allocate funds toward a deficit-neutral reserve fund relating to the apprehension and deportation of adult immigrants convicted of rape, murder, or sexual abuse of a minor after illegally entering the United States. It passed unanimously.
Senator Josh Hawley, Republican of Missouri, sought to bar Medicaid payments to Planned Parenthood, which provides abortion and other services, and criticized the organization for providing transgender care to minors. Senator John Kennedy, Republican of Louisiana, also attempted to tack on the G.O.P. voter identification bill, known as the SAVE America Act. Both proposals were blocked when Democrats, joined by a few Republicans, voted to strike them as unrelated to the budget plan.
The Republicans who crossed party lines to oppose their own party’s proposals for new voting requirements were Ms. Collins along with Senators Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Thom Tillis of North Carolina.
Ms. Collins and Ms. Murkowski also opposed the effort to block payments to Planned Parenthood.
-
New York1 hour agoShould a Straight Person Represent Stonewall’s City Council District?
-
Detroit, MI2 hours agoBlake Miller has high floor, big upside, says Lions GM Brad Holmes
-
San Francisco, CA2 hours agoHighway 1 closure in San Francisco expected to snarl Sunset traffic all weekend
-
Dallas, TX2 hours agoHow UCF EDGE Malachi Lawrence Fits With The Dallas Cowboys
-
Miami, FL2 hours ago
Dolphins Select Two Players in The First Round of The 2026 NFL Draft
-
Boston, MA2 hours agoIn-Store Only
-
Denver, CO3 hours agoWolves Back Up the Big Talk With Blowout Win Over Denver in Game 3
-
Seattle, WA3 hours ago‘Rare’ Tiny-Home Compound Featuring 3 Adorable Abodes Hits the Market in Seattle for Just $900K