Let Trans Kids Speak for Themselves

COLUMBUS- Today, in an historic win for bodily autonomy and LGBTQ+ Ohioans, a three judge panel on the Tenth District Court of Appeals overturned House Bill 68, Ohio’s law banning gender-affirming medical care for trans youth, and prohibiting trans women and girls from participating in sports. The case, Moe v. Yost, was originally filed on March 26 by the American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU of Ohio, and the global law firm Goodwin on behalf of two families whose transgender adolescents would be negatively impacted by HB 68. On August 6, following a five-day trial in July, the Franklin County Court of Common Pleas rejected the plaintiffs’ challenge, and allowed the ban to take effect. Today, transgender youth in Ohio will once again be able to access lifesaving healthcare. The following is reaction to the ruling: Freda Levenson, Legal Director at the ACLU of Ohio: “Today, we celebrate this win not only for our brave plaintiffs, but for all LGBTQ+ Ohioans and their families. This win restores the right of trans youth in Ohio to choose vitally important health care, with the support of their families and physicians. We are gratified by the Court’s decision, which soundly rejects this interference of politicians with Ohioans’ bodily autonomy. Although this litigation will likely not end here, we remain fervently committed to preventing this egregious bill from ever again taking effect. The path towards protecting the rights and civil liberties of trans Ohioans goes on, and we will continue to hold the torch.” Harper Seldin, Senior Staff Attorney, American Civil Liberties Union: “This is a critical victory for transgender youth and their families across Ohio. The state’s ban is discriminatory, baseless, and a danger to the well-being of the same Ohioan youth lawmakers claim to want to protect. It’s also part of a sweeping effort to drive trans people out of public life altogether by controlling our health care, our families, and our lives. We’re thankful the court upheld their rights under the state constitution.” Miranda Hooker, Complex Litigation & Dispute Resolution Partner, Goodwin: "We applaud the families who courageously shared their personal experiences to oppose House Bill 68. This victory underscores the critical need to safeguard bodily autonomy and access to essential healthcare. The decision marks an important milestone in advancing equality and personal freedom for all Ohioans and we will continue to fight against the unconstitutional Bill moving forward." The ruling can be found online here.

Three transgender people currently incarcerated in federal custody have filed a class action lawsuit against the Trump Administration and the Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP) challenging an Executive Order and new BOP policies prohibiting their access to gender-affirming care. The class action lawsuit was filed in federal court in Washington, D.C., on behalf of approximately 2,000 transgender people incarcerated in federal prisons across the United States.

RICHMOND, Va. -- On Friday, February 28th, the ACLU of North Carolina joined the ACLU Disability Rights Program, Rights Behind Bars, Tycko & Zavareei LLP, and Kaplan & Grady LLC, in filing an appeal with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit on behalf of Tracey Edwards. While she was incarcerated in the North Carolina Correctional Institution for Women (NCCIW), prison officials abruptly cut off Ms. Edwards' medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) after she gave birth, causing an extremely painful, dangerous, and unnecessary withdrawal. Prison officials also kept Ms. Edwards shackled during and after giving birth – in direct violation of the prison system’s own policy – causing severe pain and interfering with Ms. Edwards’ ability to bond with her newborn child. “People who are incarcerated deserve respect and dignity, as well as safe and responsive medical care,” said D Dangaran, Director of Gender Justice Rights Behind Bars. “By shackling Ms. Edwards during childbirth, keeping her shackled after she gave birth, and cutting off her medication, prison officials needlessly escalated the physical, mental, and emotional harm to Ms. Edwards during a time when she was already vulnerable.” “The use of shackles on Ms. Edwards and the denial of MOUD caused her pain and suffering, and greatly increased the risk of relapse, overdose, and death,” said Shana Khader, partner at Tycko and Zavareei LLP. “Defendants in this case violated medical standards of care as well as Ms. Edwards’ civil rights.” Ms. Edwards brought claims for damages under the Eighth Amendment and federal disability rights laws. The district court ruled against Ms. Edwards. In this appeal, Ms. Edwards seeks to have the district court’s decision reversed so a jury can decide her claims. “The treatment that Ms. Edwards experienced is both inhumane and unconstitutional,” said Joseph Longley, ACLU Disability Rights Program Staff Attorney. “This appeal is about accountability. No one, especially a new mother, should endure such cruel and degrading conditions. And no one should be denied access to their lifesaving medications for opioid use disorder, especially when tens of thousands of Americans are dying of an overdose every year. We are working to ensure Ms. Edwards gets her day in court and that this kind of mistreatment is never repeated.” The brief can be found here: https://www.acluofnorthcarolina.org/sites/default/files/field_documents/2025.02.28_appellants_opening_brief_4th_cir._dkt._23-1.pdf

PROVIDENCE, R.I. — The National Endowment for the Arts today agreed to remove a certification requirement that forced artists to attest that they will not “promote gender ideology” in order to apply for funding while the outcome of the case from the American Civil Liberties Union and the ACLU of Rhode Island is pending. Artists can now apply for funding without attesting to the new “gender ideology” requirement, but the NEA has not agreed to remove its new eligibility criteria, under which any projects that appear to “promote gender ideology” will not receive an award. Applicants who choose to submit Part 1 of the grant application before the NEA changes its Assurance of Compliance or before March 11, whichever is sooner, may still want to make clear that they object to the certification when submitting that piece of their application. “Artists and arts organizations should feel free to submit Part 1 of the NEA application on March 11 without having to agree to a certification that could have compromised their values or their vision,” said Vera Eidelman, senior staff attorney at the ACLU. “We will continue to seek urgent relief against the NEA’s unconstitutional bar on projects that express messages the government doesn’t like, but this is a huge step towards initial relief. We won’t stop fighting until these new requirements are struck down for good.” The ACLU is asking for a preliminary injunction on the funding prohibition ahead of the final grant application deadline on March 24. The ACLU, the ACLU of Rhode Island, David Cole, and Lynette Labinger, cooperating counsel for the ACLU-RI, filed suit Thursday in the U.S. District Court of Rhode Island on behalf of Rhode Island Latino Arts; National Queer Theater; The Theater Offensive; and the Theater Communications Group. The suit argues that the new certification requirement and funding prohibition violate the Administrative Procedure Act, the First Amendment, and the Fifth Amendment. A hearing date is scheduled for March 18. More information about the case can be found here: https://www.aclu.org/cases/rhode-island-latino-arts-v-national-endowment-for-the-arts