
Two amazing updates on this case. First, Jen and Angelique are married! Last Friday, the Santa Fe County Clerk issued them a marriage license and they got married in a cancer center while Jen was on a break from a chemotherapy infusion. There's just no way to overstate the importance of that moment to them, they were overwhelmed.

Second, on Monday we got a broader order from the judge in their case, one that instructs the clerks of the two most populous New Mexico counties to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples. So we've won the freedom to marry in big swaths of New Mexico and we're waiting to see whether the ruling gets appealed. We're also working on how we can ensure that the ruling clearly applies state-wide.

The progress on marriage, both in New Mexico and nationally, is simply incredible.
Learn more about same-sex marriage and other civil liberty issues: Sign up for breaking news alerts, follow us on Twitter, and like us on Facebook.
Learn More About the Issues on This Page
Related Content
-
Press ReleaseFeb 2025
LGBTQ Rights
Transgender and Nonbinary People Take Trump to Court Over Passport Restrictions
WASHINGTON – Following an executive order from President Donald Trump barring people from updating the sex designation on their passports, seven people have filed a federal lawsuit challenging the State Department’s refusal to issue passports with accurate sex designations. On his first day in office, 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 “to require that government-issued identification documents, including passports, visas, and Global Entry cards” reflect their sex “at conception.” Under the ensuing Passport Policy, within 24 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. “I’ve lived virtually my entire adult life as a man. Everyone in my personal and professional life knows me as a man, and any stranger on the street who encountered me would view me as a man,” said Reid Solomon-Lane of North Adams, Massachusetts. “I thought that 18 years after transitioning, I would be able to live my life in safety and ease. Now, as a married father of three, Trump’s executive order and the ensuing passport policy have threatened that life of safety and ease. If my passport were to reflect a sex designation that is inconsistent with who I am, I would be forcibly outed every time I used my passport for travel or identification, causing potential risk to my safety and my family’s safety.” The ACLU has been contacted through its legal intake form by over 1,500 transgender people or family members, many with passport applications suspended or pending, who are concerned about being able to get passports that accurately reflect their identity. For years, including throughout the first Trump Administration, the State Department has allowed people to change the sex designation on their passport to be in alignment with their gender identity. In 2022, the State Department issued a revised policy making it easier to update the sex designation, and allowing individuals to select M, F, or X for their sex. Similar policies are used in 21 states plus the District of Columbia with regards to birth certificates and driver’s licenses as well as countries around the world. Since the Executive Order was signed, the State Department has said publicly that applications to obtain a sex designation consistent with their gender identity rather than their sex assigned at birth have been “suspended.” An official with the White House has stated that the pending policy requiring passports to bear the holder’s sex assigned at birth will not be applied retroactively. The new lawsuit was filed by the American Civil Liberties Union, ACLU of Massachusetts, and law firm Covington & 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’s 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. “The plaintiffs in this case have had their lives disrupted by a chaotic policy clearly motivated by animus that serves zero public interest,” said Sruti Swaminathan, Staff Attorney for the ACLU’s LGBTQ & HIV Project. “Our clients need to travel for work, school, and family, and forcing them to carry documents that directly contradict what they know about themselves to be true–or withhold those documents altogether–is a blatant effort to violate their privacy and deny them their freedom to be themselves. We’re thankful for their participation in this lawsuit and are hopeful the court will see through this flagrant attempt to violate our plaintiffs' rights under the Constitution.” “This is yet another example of the Trump administration attempting to deny the dignity of transgender people and trying to push them out of public life,” said Jessie Rossman, legal director at the ACLU of Massachusetts. “These efforts are cruel, unfair, and unlawful. We’re challenging this unconstitutional Passport Policy because all people deserve the freedom to live their lives safely and with dignity.” “Transgender, intersex, and nonbinary people deserve dignity, privacy, and the right to travel, just as all people do,” said Isaac D. Chaput, a partner in Covington’s San Francisco office. “We admire the courage of our clients to stand up to this attempt to deprive them of these fundamental rights, and we’re proud to represent them alongside the ACLU and ACLU of Massachusetts.” Today’s lawsuit argues the Passport Policy implemented by the State Department violates the Administrative Procedures Act because it is unconstitutional and arbitrary and capricious, and because it failed to comply with requirements to provide notice and comment for changes to government forms. The lawsuit also asserts that the State Department’s actions violate transgender, intersex, and nonbinary people’s rights under the Due Process Clause of the U.S. Constitution by unlawfully restricting their freedom of movement, as well as their rights under the Equal Protection Clause by unjustifiably discriminating against them on the basis of their sex. The policy also violates the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution by requiring people to have a sex designation on their passport that conflicts with their identity and potentially outs them to others. This violates the First Amendment’s protection against being required to convey governmental ideological messages they disagree with. Today's filing can be found here.Affiliate: Massachusetts -
Press ReleaseFeb 2025
Free Speech
LGBTQ Rights
ACLU and ACLU of Utah Celebrate Win for Drag Performers’ First Amendment Rights
ST. GEORGE, Utah — Today, the American Civil Liberties Union of Utah Foundation, Inc. (ACLU of Utah), ACLU, and the law firm Jenner and Block announced a historic settlement agreement on behalf of Mitski Avalōx and Southern Utah Drag Stars (Drag Stars). The case, Southern Utah Drag Stars v. the City of St. George, was filed in May of 2023 after the city of St. George denied Drag Stars a special event permit for a family-friendly drag show. The city’s refusal to grant Drag Stars a permit is part of a years-long effort to target drag performances and LGBTQ+ pride events in violation of the First and 14th Amendments, as well as the Utah Constitution. “The courage of Drag Stars and Mitski Avalōx to bring this case affirmed what has always been true: all Utahns are entitled to the fundamental protections of the First Amendment, said Thomas Ford, staff attorney at the ACLU of Utah. “This is a win not just for our clients, but for all people who care about limiting the government’s ability to impose subjective views of what they deem appropriate on all of us.” On March 3, 2023, Drag Stars applied for a city of St. George special events permit to host a family-friendly drag event, Allies & Community Drag Show Festival, at J.C. Snow Park. A few weeks later, the city denied the application, alleging that Drag Stars did not comply with the city of St George’s advertising ordinance, an obscure local rule which prohibits advertising for special events until the event permit is granted. Drag Stars appealed the denial, and during the appeal process, at least one city council member acknowledged that the advertising ban is not enforceable. Nonetheless, the city of St. George denied Drag Stars’ appeal. In May of 2023, the ACLU of Utah, ACLU, and Jenner & Block filed a lawsuit on behalf of Drag Stars and Mitski Avalōx challenging the city of St. George’s denial of the event permit and unlawful censorship of drag performances in violation of our client’s First Amendment rights. On June 16, 2023, the United States District Court for the District of Utah granted Drag Stars’ request for a preliminary injunction and ordered the city of St. George to reverse its denial of Drag Stars’ special event application and issue a permit allowing Drag Stars to host their family-friendly drag performance. In doing so, the court recognized that the protections of the First Amendment extend to drag performances like the family-friendly event hosted by Drag Stars. “Amid nationwide attacks on LGBTQ+ people, this settlement is a reminder that the First Amendment protects everyone,” said Emerson Sykes, senior staff attorney with the ACLU Speech, Privacy, and Technology Project. “Drag is undeniably a form of artistic and political expression and we couldn’t be more pleased that our clients’ rights have been vindicated.” Under the 2025 settlement agreement, the city of St. George admitted that their denial of Drag Stars’ special event application violated Drag Stars’ First Amendment rights and agreed to publicly apologize to Drag Stars for this violation. "This victory isn’t just mine—it’s a win for every queer person who’s been told to stay invisible. Drag is a powerful form of expression, affirming that the First Amendment protects us all, including drag performers. The city council of St. George tried to censor us but the Constitution was on our sides,” said Mitski Avalōx, founder of Southern Utah Drag Stars and the plaintiff in this case.Court Case: Southern Utah Drag Stars, LLC v. City of St. GeorgeAffiliate: Utah -
MarylandFeb 2025
LGBTQ Rights
PFLAG v. Trump
Transgender young adults and families with transgender youth, together with PFLAG National and GLMA, filed a federal legal challenge against a January 2025 executive order from the Trump administration directing federal agencies to withhold funds from medical providers and institutions that provide gender-affirming medical treatments for people under nineteen.Status: Ongoing -
Press ReleaseFeb 2025
LGBTQ Rights
Families and Advocates Sue Trump Administration Over Executive Order Seeking to Restrict Access to Gender-Affirming Care
WASHINGTON – Transgender young adults and families with transgender youth joined PFLAG National and GLMA in a federal legal challenge against an executive order from the Trump administration attempting to shut down access to necessary medical care for transgender people under 19 nationwide. The order directs federal agencies to withhold funds from medical providers and institutions that offer gender-affirming medical treatments such as puberty suppressants and hormone therapies to anyone under 19, threatening to shut down access to essential health care that is already out of reach for many. If enforced, the order would deny critical federal funds to hospitals, clinics, doctors, and other providers, leading some provider networks to prematurely cancel appointments with transgender youth and announce they are ceasing care altogether. Today’s lawsuit was filed by the American Civil Liberties Union, Lambda Legal, the ACLU of Maryland, and law firms Hogan Lovells and Jenner & Block on behalf of two transgender young adults and five transgender adolescents and their families whose health care has been disrupted by President Trump’s order. Also joining the case as plaintiffs are PFLAG National, the nation’s largest organization supporting LGBTQ+ people and their families, with over 550,000 members and supporters and nearly 350 chapters across the country; and GLMA, the country’s largest organization of LGBTQ+ and allied health professionals. “PFLAG parents are good and decent people who love their trans kids and want them to grow up to become thriving, happy, healthy adults. Yet, President Trump and other politicians maliciously harm our families by denying them access to physician-prescribed, medically recommended care. This order puts trans and nonbinary young people and their families at risk—and we’re not putting up with it,” said Brian K. Bond (he/him), chief executive officer of PFLAG National. “To every transgender and nonbinary youth and young adult, every parent, every family, know this: PFLAG National is not backing down from this fight; PFLAG’s got you.” “For decades, doctors and other health professionals have followed well-established medical standards to provide care that helps transgender youth thrive,” said Alex Sheldon, MA (they/them), executive director of GLMA. “Now, an extreme political agenda is trying to overrule that expertise, putting young people and their providers in danger. GLMA is taking this fight to court because our members will not stand by while politicians try to criminalize the care they provide and deny medically-necessary treatment to young people. We are confident that the law, science, and history are on our side.” The complaint was filed in the federal District Court of the District of Maryland and will be imminently followed by a request for an immediate restraining order against the enforcement of President Trump’s order. “President Trump has shown a clear determination to use every lever of government to drive transgender people out of public life,” said Joshua Block, senior counsel for the ACLU’s LGBT & HIV Project. “Today’s order lays out a clear plan to shut down access to life-saving medical care for transgender youth nationwide, overriding the role of families and putting politics between patients and their doctors. We will not allow this dangerous, sweeping, and unconstitutional order to stand.” “The President’s denial of care order is morally reprehensible and patently unlawful. The federal government – particularly, this administration – has no right to insert itself into conversations and decision-making that rightly belongs only to patients, their families, and their medical providers” said Omar Gonzalez-Pagan, senior counsel and health care strategist for Lambda Legal. “This broadside condemns transgender young people to extreme and unnecessary pain and suffering, and for minors, it subjects their parents to agonized futility in caring for their child — all while denying them access to the same medically recommended health care that is readily available to their non-transgender peers.” In December 2024, the Supreme Court held oral arguments in U.S. v. Skrmetti, a landmark case challenging Tennessee’s categorical ban on gender-affirming hormonal therapies for transgender youth on the grounds the law violates the Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution by discriminating based on sex. The case began when an initial lawsuit was first filed by the American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU of Tennessee, Lambda Legal, and Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP on behalf of three transgender adolescents and their families. While it is expected the new administration will reverse the stance of the U.S. government, the case remains briefed and argued, and the Supreme Court must consider the same question of whether Tennessee’s law violates the Equal Protection clause. A decision is expected from the court by June 2025. The executive order targeting providers of gender-affirming care was one of several signed by the president since taking office calling for widespread discrimination against transgender people in their public and private lives. The president also issued orders targeting schools that protect the rights of transgender students, ban transgender people from serving in the military, ban transgender people from updating the gender marker on their U.S. passports, exclusively house transgender women in men’s prison facilities, and direct federal agencies to discriminate against transgender people employed by the U.S. government. These orders have described transgender people as “mutilated,” compared their identities to a “contagion,” and said they inherently lack “honesty” as compared to cisgender men.Affiliate: Maryland