These Queer Lawmakers Will Not Be Silenced
June 15, 2023
This year has brought a new level of anti-democratic behavior, particularly in state houses and legislatures. In March, Rep. Mauree Turner from Oklahoma was censured for offering a protester the use of an office in the aftermath of an arrest. In April, two Tennessee state representatives, Reps. Justin Jones and Justin Pearson, were ousted for speaking up for their constituents protesting against gun violence. And then in May, Rep. Zooey Zephyr was censured for her vocal opposition to a bill banning gender-affirming care for minors.
The retaliation experienced by these elected officials hints at the growing vulnerability of the right to express dissent in politics and government, a worrying trend. The rise in bans attacking the LGBTQ community is being met with protest, the foundational American mechanism we have for showing disapproval and standing up for our values in our representative democracy. When that right to dissent is threatened, we all are threatened, and the LGBTQ community is put even further at risk. Joining us today to talk about this silencing effect are Rep. Zooey Zephyr from Montana and Rep. Mauree Turner from Oklahoma.
In this episode
Kendall Ciesemier
This Episode Covers the Following Issues
Related Content
-
Press ReleaseApr 2026
LGBTQ Rights
Montana Supreme Court Blocks Policy Barring Transgender People From Updating Identity Documents. Explore Press Release.Montana Supreme Court Blocks Policy Barring Transgender People from Updating Identity Documents
HELENA - Earlier today, the Montana Supreme Court upheld a District Court order temporarily preventing the State of Montana from enforcing policies that bar transgender people from obtaining accurate sex designations on their birth certificates and driver’s licenses. This means that transgender Montanans will continue to have access to accurate and usable identity documents while the case proceeds. In December 2024, the District Court granted Plaintiffs’ request to block the State from enforcing its discriminatory policies, finding that the policies likely violate their’ “fundamental right to be free from discrimination on the basis of sex under the Montana Constitution.” In today’s decision, the Montana Supreme Court agreed with the District Court and recognized that and that “[t]ransgender discrimination is, by its very nature, sex discrimination” and that the policy treated transgender people unequally compared to their cisgender counterparts. “I am deeply grateful and encouraged by the Montana Supreme Court’s decision to uphold the injunction,” said Plaintiff Jessica Kalarchik “This victory represents not only a personal milestone, but also a meaningful affirmation of fairness, justice and the rule of law.” “This is a good day not just for transgender individuals but for all Montanans,” said Akilah Deernose, Executive Director of the ACLU of Montana. “Our Constitution exists to protect all of us from government overreach, and we are pleased that the Montana Supreme Court faithfully interpreted our Equal Protection Clause to protect against unlawful discrimination.” “Today’s ruling is an important victory for transgender people across the state of Montana, and perhaps even a glimmer of relief to transgender people across the country who are enduring a relentless effort to strip away their rights at nearly every level of government,” said Malita Picasso, Staff Attorney for the ACLU’s LGBTQ & HIV Project. “We will not stop fighting for transgender Montanans.” Following this ruling, the case will now return to the District Court where Plaintiffs will fight to obtain a final decision on the merits. Until that final decision, transgender Montanans can continue to obtain a birth certificate and drivers’ license that accurately reflects their identity. Today’s order from the Montana Supreme Court can be found here. Click here for more about Kalarchik v. State of MontanaCourt Case: Kalarchik v. State of MontanaAffiliate: Montana -
Washington, D.C.May 2026
LGBTQ Rights
Withrow V. United States Et Al. Explore Case.Withrow v. United States et al
LeAnne Withrow of Springfield, Illinois is a lead military and family readiness specialist and civilian employee for the Illinois National Guard. Previously, she served as a staff sergeant for the National Guard and is the recipient of multiple commendations and awards, including the Illinois National Guard Abraham Lincoln Medal of Freedom. Following a January 20, 2025 executive order signed by President Trump, officials with the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, the U.S. Department of Defense, and the federal National Guard Bureau issued notices to all employees requiring use of designated restrooms strictly based upon their “biological sex,” as inaccurately defined in the executive order. Soon after, Withrow was told by supervisors within her chain of command that she could not use restrooms designated for women. On May 5, Ms. Withrow filed a class action complaint to the Army National Guard Bureau Equal Opportunity Office (NGB-EO), and later to the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), challenging the federal order, but both the NGB-EO and EEOC failed to resolve the matter. In November 2025, Withrow filed a class action lawsuit alleging that the executive order and implementation actions violate Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits sex discrimination in employment, and that the order and implementation violate the federal Administrative Procedure Act. The complaint was filed on behalf of Ms. Withrow by the American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU of D.C., the ACLU of Illinois, and Democracy Forward. “No one should have to choose between their career in service and their own dignity,” said Withrow. “I bring respect and honor to the work I do to support military families, and I hope the court will restore dignity to transgender people like me who serve this country every day.”Status: Ongoing -
Press ReleaseMar 2026
LGBTQ Rights
Kansas State Court Denies Temporary Restraining Order Against State Law Invalidating Ids And Restricting Bathroom Access For Transgender People. Explore Press Release.Kansas State Court Denies Temporary Restraining Order Against State Law Invalidating IDs and Restricting Bathroom Access for Transgender People
Lawrence, K.S. - A judge for the District Court of Douglas County rejected a request for a temporary restraining order blocking enforcement of SB 244, a Kansas state law that immediately invalidated the driver’s licenses of transgender people across the state and which authorizes anyone to sue anybody they suspect of being transgender for using the “wrong” restroom in government buildings. “This is a devastating, but hopefully temporary, setback for our clients and transgender people across the state of Kansas,” said Harper Seldin, Senior Staff Attorney for the ACLU’s LGBTQ & HIV Rights Project. “The harm of this law has already had sweeping impacts on the lives of transgender people like our clients, threatening their ability to hold a job, go to school, or go about their daily lives. We all deserve the freedom to be ourselves without politicians interfering in our lives, and we will keep fighting SB 244 until it is erased from state law entirely. We look forward to demonstrating at a temporary injunction hearing that this law is unconstitutional and deeply harmful and should be enjoined.” SB 244, passed into law by the state legislature over Governor Laura Kelly’s veto, prohibits transgender people from using public restrooms that align with their gender identity on government property. It also establishes a private right of action that allows anyone who suspects someone is transgender and in violation of the law to sue that person for “damages” totaling $1,000. The law also invalidates Kansas-issued driver’s licenses with updated gender markers that reflect the carrier’s gender identity. Last week, transgender people across the state received letters from the state Department of Revenue’s Division of Vehicles informing them that their driver’s licenses “will no longer be valid,” effective immediately. The law also prohibits transgender Kansans – or those born in Kansas - from updating the gender marker on state-issued birth certificates and driver’s licenses in the future. Doe v. State of Kansas was filed in the District Court of Douglas County on behalf of anonymous Plaintiffs Daniel Doe and Matthew Moe by the American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU of Kansas, and Ballard Spahr LLP. The lawsuit charges that SB 244 violates the Kansas Constitution’s protections for personal autonomy, privacy, equality under the law, due process, and freedom of speech. Today’s order from the court can be found here.Affiliate: Kansas -
KansasMar 2026
LGBTQ Rights
Doe V. State Of Kansas. Explore Case.Doe v. State of Kansas
Two transgender residents of Kansas filed a lawsuit in state court challenging SB 244, a state law enacted in 2026 that immediately invalidated the driver’s licenses of transgender people across the state and which authorizes anyone to sue anybody they suspect of being transgender for using the “wrong” restroom in government buildings.