President Biden campaigned on a promise to restore our asylum laws, which allow people who can prove they are fleeing persecution because of their race, religion, political beliefs, nationality, or social group to secure permanent protection in the U.S. He specifically pledged to end a harmful Trump-era policy known as the “transit ban” that unfairly barred asylum for vulnerable migrants fleeing danger who did not apply for asylum in another country before reaching the U.S. southern border. But Biden recently announced plans to revive key features of that policy, along with aspects of another Trump ban that illegally blocked asylum for people who entered the country without going through an official border crossing.

These policies are harmful and illegal. The administration must immediately change course and make good on its pledge to ensure the most vulnerable have access to refuge.

The right to seek asylum, guaranteed in U.S. law, stems from international agreements following the atrocities of World War II. It reflects our nation’s commitment to protect people in need of refuge, and to prevent the forced return of vulnerable people into harm’s way. Congress designed our asylum laws to ensure that everyone escaping persecution has a chance to seek safe harbor here, regardless of how they must flee danger or enter the country.

The administration must recognize how bad it looks to bring back an anti-immigrant Trump policy from Stephen Miller’s playbook, especially one that multiple courts found to be unlawful. Despite the administration’s efforts to distinguish its proposal from Trump’s, they share a common core, which is to punish people for not requesting asylum in the countries they must travel through to reach the U.S., like Mexico and Guatemala. This ignores the obvious reason why so many do not seek asylum there: These countries do not offer real sanctuary for migrants fleeing persecution.

The administration’s own records, alongside NGO reports, make it painfully clear that these countries have not developed working asylum systems and that, for many migrants, it would be pointless and life-threatening to stay and apply. Critically, our courts have long recognized that a person’s decision not to seek asylum while in transit to the U.S. has no bearing on their need for protection.

This means that, like Trump’s rule, Biden’s proposal would send people facing persecution back to danger and bar asylum even to those people with the strongest claims. This includes people like a Cameroonian refugee who was barred from asylum under Trump’s transit ban, despite being brutally tortured by his country’s military for being an independence activist.

Biden has claimed that his proposal is different because the administration has separately created programs that allow people from four countries to apply in advance for temporary permission to come to the U.S. However, they only apply to a small number of nationalities and have limited capacity. They also require that applicants have a U.S. financial sponsor, a passport, resources to pay for a costly plane ticket, and the ability to wait for the application’s approval — the very things that the most vulnerable asylum seekers lack.

The core concept of asylum is that a person has an urgent need for protection — often from their own government. Although the new programs will benefit those who qualify, they are not a realistic option for many people who cannot ask their persecutor for travel permission or who are unable to wait in dangerous conditions while applying for approval, let alone those who lack financial sponsors and resources of their own.

The administration has also suggested that the potentially deadly impact of the proposed ban will be mitigated because migrants may be able to access asylum if they make a border appointment through an application on their phone. But this policy echoes Trump’s first asylum ban, found unlawful by the courts, that also barred people who entered the U.S. without going through an official border crossing. This approach disregards a key reality asylum seekers face in pursuit of safety.

The most vulnerable asylum seekers, who are frequently poor and who may speak neither English nor Spanish, are often those least likely to have the resources or capability to use a complicated smartphone app in a foreign language or wait weeks or months in danger for an appointment. This is precisely why our laws prioritize protection and allow individuals to be considered for asylum regardless of how they enter or arrive in the country.

Biden’s proposed tweaks to Trump’s asylum bans are mere window dressing, designed to try to hide the needless suffering the plan will inflict on desperate people who must make the journey to safety however they can. It would leave many of the most vulnerable asylum seekers in the same position as Trump’s bans did — unfairly denied critical, permanent protection for reasons that have nothing to do with their need for refuge.

Trans youth are once again under attack in state legislatures across the country. This year, dozens of proposed bills would require schools to out trans students against their will, regardless of any harmful consequences at school or at home. These forced outing bills claim to protect parents’ rights, but they do no such thing. Instead, these bills endanger trans students, who have the right not to be outed and to be treated with dignity and respect at school.

People — children and adults — have a constitutional right not to have intimate facts about their lives disclosed without their consent. That includes their sexual orientation, HIV status, or whether they are transgender. Children do not give up their constitutional rights by enrolling in public school. Students also have rights under federal law to keep certain information private, and not to have that information revealed without their consent. But forced outing bills are designed to do exactly that: reveal private information about trans students, regardless of whether the student consents or whether they may suffer negative or harmful consequences at school or at home from that disclosure.

Many parents may hope their children will come to them first with questions about gender and sexuality. But not every child has that option. Youth who are transgender face a real risk of rejection by the adults who are supposed to care for them when they disclose their gender identity. Trans people are much more likely to be abused by their immediate family based on their gender identity, and high risks of abuse and family rejection mean trans youth are overrepresented in foster care homes, juvenile detention centers, and homeless shelters. These high rates of familial rejection and abuse dramatically increase the risks of suicidality, substance abuse, and depression. Not every child can be their true selves at home without risking their physical or emotional well-being.

In addition, many supportive parents may want their children to be able to safely explore their identity without being worried that information will be disclosed against their will, and to have a safe space to ask questions they may be uncomfortable asking at home. For trans youth, especially those who cannot be safe at home, school may be one of the few places to be themselves. Trans youth thrive when they are affirmed in their gender identity, which includes being called by a name and pronouns that reflect who they are. When trans youth are supported at home, they can become the happy, confident children their parents hoped they would be. As trans youth themselves report, living as their true selves transforms their lives for the better. Many schools across the country recognize that a supportive learning environment requires treating trans students with dignity and respect, including (at a minimum) calling them by the name and pronouns they want to use.

Forced outing bills are not about parents’ rights: they are designed to harm trans students. Parents have a fundamental right to raise their children, including making important choices like whether to homeschool or enroll in public school. And the ACLU vigorously defends parents’ rights to raise their children, including the rights of LGBTQ parents, and parents’ rights to seek necessary and life-saving care for their children.

But none of those fundamental parental rights are protected by forced outing bills. Parents do not have a constitutional right to be told whenever their child uses a name or pronoun that is not typically associated with the child’s assigned sex at birth. Lawmakers know that —that’s why some of these forced outing bills explicitly do not require parental notification when a student asks to be called by their middle name, or a shortened version of their first name. Instead, these bills require schools to notify parents if someone at school thinks a student might be trans, based on gender nonconformity or a request to use a different name or pronoun.

Forced outing bills are meant to harm trans students, and in the process, hurt everyone: Some of these bills require parental notification any time a student acts in a way that doesn’t fit the school’s view of how a boy or a girl should act or dress. These kinds of laws don’t strengthen families; they just hurt kids, and especially trans youth.

Since 2015, political attacks against LGBTQ people have grown exponentially in state legislatures across the country. The ACLU has launched a nationwide tracking system to publicly document and categorize anti-LGBTQ bills introduced in state legislatures, and guide users to learn more about efforts to protect LGBTQ people and the right to safe, inclusive schools and communities.

The goal of this page is to help advocates, organizers, and allies take action against these bills while also revealing these proposals for what they are: a coordinated and political attack on LGBTQ people nationwide.

American Civil Liberties Union

Mapping Attacks on LGBTQ Rights in U.S. State Legislatures

The ACLU is tracking attacks on LGBTQ rights and working with our national network of affiliates to support LGBTQ people everywhere.

A: Our legal and advocacy team uses a bill-tracking service and works with ACLU affiliates and local organizations across the country to monitor state legislatures for bills targeting the rights of LGBTQ people. Each bill is reviewed by legal staff at the ACLU’s LGBTQ & HIV Project before being categorized on this site.

The ACLU’s first priority in this work is stopping any anti-LGBTQ bill from becoming law by working alongside our affiliates and coalition partners, building relationships with grassroots activists, direct engagement with lawmakers, and educating the broader public about the harms of these attacks. Because of this hard work, most proposed anti-LGBTQ bills never become law.

Bills that do become law may face a legal challenge from the ACLU, its affiliates, or one of our many partners across the LGBTQ rights movement. In recent years, the ACLU has challenged bills across the country restricting access to gender-affirming health care, barring trans people from updating identity documents, and denying transgender students equal access to school facilities and activities, as well as defending inclusive policies from political and legal attacks.

Show Up for Civil Liberties: Donate Now.
From free speech to reproductive freedom to immigrants' rights, the ACLU has shown up for over 100 years to protect civil liberties and civil rights for all — and we won't stop now. Donate today to help fund critical litigation, advocacy, and grassroots efforts.

A: Each bill is assigned one or more categories based on its focus and issue matter. These include:

Health Care Access

Lawmakers are targeting access to medically-necessary health care for transgender people. Many of these bills ban affirming care for trans youth, and can even create criminal penalties for providing this care. These bills exempt identical treatments offered to cisgender youth and even surgeries forced onto intersex youth. Other bills block funding to medical centers that offer gender-affirming care, or block Medicaid or other insurance coverage of health care for transgender people.

Public Accommodations

Everyone should have access to spaces like restrooms and locker rooms, no matter their gender identity or gender expression, but these bills prohibit transgender people from using facilities like public restrooms and locker rooms. If you can’t use the restroom, you can’t fully participate in work, school, and public life.

Schools and Education

State lawmakers are trying to prevent trans students from participating in school activities like sports, force teachers to out students, and censor in-school discussions of LGBTQ people and issues. Instead of limiting resources, education, and opportunities, our schools should protect and support all students to learn and thrive.

Free Speech and Expression

Despite the safeguards of the First Amendment’s right to free expression, politicians are fighting to restrict how and when LGBTQ people can be themselves, limiting access to books about them and trying to ban or censor performances like drag shows.

Access to Accurate IDs

These bills attempt to limit the ability to update gender information on IDs and records, such as birth certificates and driver’s licenses. This puts transgender people at risk of losing jobs, facing harassment, and other harms. Trans, intersex, and nonbinary people need IDs that accurately reflect who they are to travel, apply for jobs, and enter public establishments without risk of harassment or harm.

Weakening Civil Rights Laws

These bills attempt to undermine and weaken nondiscrimination laws by allowing employers, businesses, and even hospitals to turn away LGBTQ people or refuse them equal treatment.

Other Anti-LGBTQ Bills

These bills don’t quite fit in any of the other categories, but nonetheless target the rights of LGBTQ people. Examples include bans on marriage and bills preempting local nondiscrimination protections.

A: Each bill is reviewed by ACLU legal staff and designated an anti-LGBTQ bill based on its text, potential impact, and restrictions or intrusions based on sexual orientation or gender identity. Most of these bills may not use words like “gay” or “transgender” in their text but nonetheless aim directly to restrict the rights, safety, or liberty of LGBTQ people.

Not included on this page are bills and proposals which may have a disparate impact on LGBTQ people but are not directly targeted at LGBTQ people. Restrictions on abortion access, for example, have a disparate impact on LGBQ women and many transgender people, but will not be tallied on this page at this time. Click here to learn more about the ACLU’s work to expand reproductive freedom and abortion access.

A: Legislative tallies from previous years can be found here.

A: You can use our tracking system to see what’s happening in your state, and sign this legislative action petition to stay up to date on state legislative attacks on trans rights, reproductive freedom, and more.