RALEIGH, N.C. – Civil-rights groups, including the American Civil Liberties Union and Lambda Legal, are setting their sights on the ban on local protections for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and questioning individuals that was written into North Carolina's controversial House Bill 142.

A federal court ruled late Monday that the law, intended to replace the "bathroom bill," does not bar transgender people from using public facilities.

Chris Brook, legal director for the ACLU of North Carolina, said the decision clears the way for the next step in regaining local protections for transgender people.

"HB 142 took away the ability of cities and counties to offer anti-discrimination protections for anyone," he said, "whether it be on veteran status, whether it be against age discrimination or the ability of cities and counties to offer protections for the LGBT community."

Plaintiffs in the case argued that HB 142's "vagueness" effectively barred transgender people from using restrooms in government buildings.

Supporters of HB 142 have said it was a "measured compromise" when HB 2 was taken off the books after public outcry and protest from private industry. HB 2 originally had mandated that transgender people only use the public restroom that corresponds with the gender on their birth certificate.

Brook said the federal court's decision gives them a degree of confidence when using public facilities.

"It helps to lift some of the cloud of uncertainty that surrounds how they go about their day-to-day life," he said. "Those of us who are not transgender go to the restroom without ever having to think about it, or ever fearing that they could be excluded from the appropriate restroom."

The ruling was applauded by such national groups as the Human Rights Campaign, in addition to the plaintiffs. There is no word yet about whether the state plans to appeal.

Details of the court ruling are online at acluofnorthcarolina.org, and the text of HB 142 is at ncleg.net.

Reporting by North Carolina News Connection in association with Media in the Public Interest and funded in part by the Park Foundation.


get more stories like this via email

The U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday released an opinion that allows Tennessee to keep in place a ban on gender-affirming care for minors.

While seen as a setback for trans youth, a legal challenge in North Dakota is still active. The North Dakota case, which seeks to overturn a 2023 ban adopted by the Legislature, is moving through the state-level courts.

Brittany Stewart, senior staff attorney with the legal nonprofit Gender Justice, said proceedings in the bench trial are winding down. She said parents of transgender youth in this region might think the Supreme Court outcome permanently cuts off similar cases, but stresses they shouldn't jump to conclusions.

"I would like to tell people, especially folks who are parents of kids who might be suffering from gender dysphoria, not to give up hope," she stressed. "This is just one case, on one specific issue."

The Tennessee case focused solely on the U.S. Constitution's equal protection clause, and Stewart said the North Dakota case has other legal aspects to it. Republicans behind such bans argue they're trying to protect children, noting young people aren't mature enough for these decisions. But ban opponents say parents and doctors are deeply involved in discussing the lengthy process, and that gender-affirming surgery is rare for minors.

Stewart said the second main argument in her plaintiff's case is whether North Dakota's ban violates the right to personal autonomy. She added it's important to remember that the questions posed in this lawsuit have to do with the state constitution.

"The North Dakota Supreme Court has also said that the North Dakota Constitution isn't necessarily interpreted exactly the same as the U.S. Constitution," she continued.

She said if the judge rules in their favor, it's likely the state would appeal to the North Dakota Supreme Court. But there are questions about whether it would reach the U.S. Supreme Court because of the legal differences.

Analysts say the federal decision is still a big win for ban supporters in the nearly two dozen states that have them. But Stewart said the high court left an opening for future consideration if opponents can effectively prove such laws cause harm.


get more stories like this via email

Today is LGBTQIA+ Equal Pay Awareness Day and California advocates are speaking out against federal attacks on workplace protections.

On his first day in office, President Donald Trump signed an executive order recognizing "male" and "female" as the only two sexes and withdrawing Biden-era guidance on harassment in the workplace.

Deborah Vagins, national campaign director for Equal Rights Advocates and director of the Equal Pay Today campaign, said Department of Government Efficiency cuts have devastated agencies like the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs and the National Labor Relations Board.

"President Trump took the unprecedented action to fire officials at these independent agencies," Vagins pointed out. "He's laid off hundreds of staff; he's effectively undermined enforcement protections, especially, for LGBTQIA employees."

The administration has said the cuts are necessary to fund an extension of Trump's 2017 tax cuts. A 2021 study from the Human Rights Campaign found LGBTQ+ workers make about 90 cents for every dollar earned by other workers, with LGBTQ+ women earning only 87 cents.

Vagins argued the new administration is sending the wrong signals so far.

"The recently renominated acting EEOC Chair Andrea Lucas has made it clear that she does not plan to fully enforce employment protections for transgender and nonbinary workers," Vagins noted. "They had cases pending at the EEOC that have since been dropped."

Zakiya Thomas, president of the ERA Coalition, emphasized the Equal Rights Amendment has now been ratified by 38 state legislatures, so it should be added to the Constitution but the Trump administration has blocked it.

"The Supreme Court has actually upheld that discrimination against LGBTQ individuals is sex-based discrimination," Thomas stressed. "The Equal Rights Amendment is for everyone and so we want to make sure that we can use it to protect everyone against any kind of discrimination on the basis of sex."

June is Pride Month, and Washington's Lavender Rights Project is celebrating with a Black Trans Comedy Showcase. This is the largest fundraiser of the year for the nonprofit, which provides legal and social services for Black trans people.

Angel Patterson, director of development for Lavender Rights, said in the wake of increased attacks on trans rights across the country, the showcase prioritizes the community's health, safety, and joy.

"We are your family too," Patterson explained. "We are your mothers, your brothers, your sisters, your aunties, uncles, cousins, friends, bosses, coworkers. We're all paying parking tickets and taxes the same as everyone else."

Patterson said the showcase will be on June 14th in Seattle and will feature performers from Washington and across the country, including T.S. Madison and Mx Dahlia Belle.

So far, 923 bills targeting trans rights have been introduced across the country this year, and over 100 have passed. Patterson explains that the idea for the showcase came after hearing trans people used as punchlines for jokes in the media.

"Instead of a traditional protest we wanted to reclaim our power in another way that felt sacred to us and this event is truly that and it's a wonderful night to bring our folks together and highlight our work and really just feel the power of pride," Patterson continued.

The comedy showcase will also have auction items to help raise money for the project such as plane tickets, glass blowing classes, concert and sports tickets.