Blog

The Resistance Brief: We Don’t Need Fixing

Blog by Ricardo Martinez (he/him), Executive Director

When I was 12, my parents held our one and only family meeting ever. They sat my siblings and me down on the living room couch and proclaimed that if we “decided” to be gay, it was totally fine with them. We were loved, no matter what. Then they sent us back to our rooms.

It was awkward. It was the ’90s. They were devout Catholics. Their language wasn’t perfect, but their intention was clear: we were safe in our home, just as we were.

I didn’t fully understand the weight of that moment until I got older—until I started hearing other queer people’s growing up and coming out stories. As I moved through life, traveled, and built relationships within the LGBTQ+ community, I saw how often those stories were shaped by a lack of acceptance. Sometimes it came as quiet disapproval, sometimes as strained silence. Often, it was an outright rejection. Some people shared that they had been sent to conversion “therapy” by families who were led to believe they were helping and couldn’t see the harm being done at the time.

Conversion therapy refers to a range of discredited and dangerous practices that seek to change a person’s sexual orientation or gender identity. These practices have no basis in science or medicine, and their consequences can be devastating. Survivors often describe lasting trauma, feelings of shame, depression, anxiety, and even suicidal ideation. It’s a practice rooted in the false idea that LGBTQ+ people are broken and need to be fixed.

We don’t need fixin’.

Just last week, the U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments in Chiles v. Salazar, a case challenging Colorado’s 2019 law protecting minors from conversion therapy. Like nearly half of the states in this country, Colorado passed this law to shield young people from these very harms. But now, a therapist named Kaley Chiles, represented by the conservative group Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), is arguing that the law violates her First Amendment rights. She claims that the treatment she provides, talk therapy, is “pure speech,” and therefore can’t be subject to state regulation.

GLAD Law submitted an amicus brief to the Court, sharing stories that illustrate the lasting damage of conversion therapy. One of them was Matt Salmon’s. As a devout Mormon teen, Matt turned to conversion therapy hoping it would help him live in alignment with his faith. Instead, it left him feeling isolated, ashamed, and emotionally fractured. His relationship with his family suffered deeply. Even now, decades later, they are still trying to heal from what that experience broke.

The ADF and Chiles’s arguments being made in this case misrepresent what’s truly at stake. Colorado’s law does not ban conversations about faith or identity. It does not prevent therapists from helping clients navigate questions about gender, sexuality, and belief. What it bans are practices—by practitioners who have received a medical license from a state–that have been discredited and shown again and again to cause harm.

If the Court sides with Chiles, it could set a troubling precedent. One that limits states’ ability to regulate not just conversion therapy, but other forms of harmful mental health practices. It would send a message that protecting free speech includes protecting the right to use that speech to endanger vulnerable children.

But this case isn’t just about therapy or speech. It’s about whether LGBTQ+ people—especially kids—are allowed to grow up without being told something about them is fundamentally wrong. It’s about whether we believe everyone deserves to live free from imposed shame.

For many of us, simply existing with honesty is an act of quiet defiance. The freedom to live authentically, to embrace who we are without apology, stands in sharp contrast to the rigid boxes others still try to force us into. In that way, our very existence is resistance. A refusal to be made into something we are not.

I think back to that awkward family meeting when I was 12. My parents didn’t have the right words, but they gave me something that would prove to be incredibly rare: a sense that I was okay. That I was loved, perfectly made, and free to be me.

Every child deserves at least that much. Let’s hope the Court agrees.

What to know, what to do:

Missed our briefing on the cases and petitions before the Supreme Court this year? Check out the recording for what’s at stake and what you need to know.
We know this is a worrying time for access to transgender health care. Contact our free and confidential legal helpline, GLAD Law Answers, with any questions about losing access to care at Fenway Health or another New England medical center.
Sign up for our free community discussion on Nov. 5 to learn what state and advocacy leaders can and should do to safeguard LGBTQ+ rights and protections.
Limited tickets remain for our Spirit of Justice Award Dinner on Nov. 6! RSVP today for this inspirational evening.
“At the end of the day, we’re all just people trying to live our lives and find our happiness – nobody should be making that process harder for anyone else.” Read more from Nic Talbott, a plaintiff in our transgender military ban challenge and one of this year’s OUT 100.

Want to receive the Resistance Brief and other updates, action alerts, and event invitations in your email inbox?

Donate today to support GLAD Law’s work toward justice for all.

News

Home

Fenway Health’s Halt to Transgender Youth Care Is Heartbreaking

The decision by Fenway Health to cut off medical care for transgender patients under the age of 19 is gutting for patients and their families who rely on this flagship health center for care. The Trump administration’s efforts to stop health care for transgender people with unlawful threats to funding are devastating, and it is disheartening to witness a leading institution in LGBTQ+ health make the choice to give in to those threats. Parents and families want to provide the best possible health care for their children. For transgender adolescents, quality medical care is increasingly harder to access. This week’s announcement from Fenway is a heartbreaking blow.

If you have questions about losing access to care at Fenway or another New England health care center, we encourage you to reach out to our free and confidential legal information line at GLADLawAnswers.org

Blog

Home

The Resistance Brief: Defending the heart of civil society

Blog by Ricardo Martinez (he/him), Executive Director

When my parents couldn’t afford to fill our Christmas tree with gifts, a local athletic league showed up with presents and joy. When we struggled with food insecurity, it was our local parish that made sure we had meals on the table. As a quiet, unsure middle schooler, Council for Unity helped me find my voice – teaching me leadership, self-expression, and the courage to speak up.

In college, I volunteered with the Multiple Sclerosis Society of Suffolk County and raised funds for the Gay Men’s Health Crisis. These weren’t just extracurricular activities or acts of charity – they were lifelines. They shaped me. They provided vital assistance to people in my community. They also taught me the meaning of service, and the transformative power of kindness. I saw how compassion could move people to act, how generosity could restore dignity, and how even the smallest act of care could change a life.

Nonprofit organizations have played a profound role in my life, as they have in the lives of so many Americans.

That’s why the recent push by the Trump administration to label certain nonprofit organizations – especially those serving immigrant, LGBTQ+, and Black and Brown communities – as domestic terrorism threats is outrageous.

No president has the right to target charities, civil rights organizations, or civil society groups simply because they challenge power or stand up for justice. And yet, that’s exactly what’s happening. These actions are not about keeping us safe. They are about suppressing dissent and chilling advocacy.

We’ve seen this before.

In the 1950s, McCarthyism destroyed careers and lives by branding artists, activists, and academics as threats to the State. J. Edgar Hoover’s FBI began a program of infiltrating and dismantling civil rights and Black liberation movements through COINTELPRO (Counter Intelligence Program), treating the pursuit of equality as a national security risk.

During this time, at the height of the Lavender Scare, the federal government systematically fired thousands of LGBTQ+ employees. These purges were driven by false claims that queer people were inherently untrustworthy and posed a risk to national security.

After 9/11, Muslim communities were surveilled, harassed, and detained – not because of crimes committed, but because of who they were. Entire congregations were treated like suspects. Families were torn apart. The trauma of that era still echoes today.

And in 2017, the Trump administration created the baseless category of “Black Identity Extremists” to surveil and intimidate Black activists, as was done throughout the Civil Rights movement. Now, that same tactic is being recycled – this time against a broader group of nonprofits, funders, LGBTQ+ groups, and those who dare to fight for justice.

Historically, vulnerable communities with limited power who are vocal and steadfast in their commitment to creating a just world have always been used as scapegoats in times of political fear. These attacks aren’t about justice. They are about intimidation: that being different, being visible, or standing up for your neighbors makes you a threat.

But we know better.

Demanding safety, equality, and dignity is not a crime. What is unlawful is the government’s throttling of free speech and our constitutionally protected right to advocate for our communities. What truly strengthens this country is the courage to speak up, to show up for each other, and to refuse to accept injustice as normal.

GLAD Law remains grounded in our unwavering belief that protecting fundamental freedoms must be rooted in empathy, not cruelty. We are committed to advancing justice guided by deep respect for human dignity and the interconnectedness of our diverse communities. We find strength in inclusion, and we work alongside others to ensure that the rights we all rely on are defended with compassion, integrity, and shared responsibility for a better future. We have not, and will not, stop fighting for the dignity, safety, and full equality of LGBTQ+ Americans.

And neither should you.

For our nonprofits. For our neighbors. For the freedom to help, to care, and to hope.

Because the organizations that fed me, taught me, and gave me my voice, those spaces of healing and empowerment – they should be celebrated. Protected. And defended with everything we’ve got.

Now is the time to donate generously to the organizations that have shaped your life, volunteer your time, speak out, and show up.

Together, we can protect the rights and spaces that make our communities stronger and more just. Civil society depends on it.

What to know, what to do:

Sign up for our October 9 community briefing on what’s at stake in the new Supreme Court term.
Learn about the nonprofits that have banded together, GLAD Law included, to say we will not be intimated or silenced in the face of Trump’s directive NSPM-7.
Check out the good news! A federal judge just blocked a New Hampshire state law that would have banned important programs for ensuring equal educational access, in our case with ACLU and other partners.
Read about Army Captain Gordon Herrero, who was placed on administrative leave from his West Point teaching position after the transgender military ban was implemented.

Want to receive the Resistance Brief and other updates, action alerts, and event invitations in your email inbox?

Donate today to support GLAD Law’s work toward justice for all.

News

Home

New Resource: Protecting Transgender Youth and Families from Department of Justice Subpoenas

The Trump administration has escalated its campaign against transgender youth by issuing more than 20 civil subpoenas to health care facilities that provide care for transgender minors. At least some of these subpoenas seek broad and intrusive information—including patient records—under the guise of investigating “federal health care offenses.”

While some hospitals are fighting these subpoenas in court, families understandably have questions and concerns about their children’s privacy and safety.

The ACLU, Lambda Legal, Transgender Law Center, National Center for LGBTQ Rights, and GLAD Law created a new fact sheet to support parents and advocates.

The resource explains:

What the subpoenas are and what information they demand
How healthcare providers and courts are responding
Steps families can take to protect their children’s medical information
Where to find legal and advocacy support if your family may be affected

This resource also highlights ways parents and community members can come together to defend access to care in the face of these attacks.

Read the Fact Sheet

If you have more questions or need legal support, please contact GLAD Law Answers.

News

Home

Federal court grants preliminary injunction blocking NH state law attacking diversity, equity, and inclusion

Law would have forced K-12 public school educators and colleges and universities to guess what was prohibited or risk loss of funding

The federal court in New Hampshire today issued a preliminary injunction blocking, for almost all public school districts, a law banning diversity, equity, and inclusion programs pertaining to race, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, and disability in New Hampshire K-12 public schools and public and private universities. The Court held that the plaintiffs are likely to succeed on their claims that the law violates due process and is contradicted by federal disability civil rights laws.

Read the preliminary injunction.

The Court explained: “The breadth of the anti-DEI laws’ prohibition is startling. The definition of ‘DEI’ contained therein is so far-reaching that it prohibits long-accepted—even legally required—teaching and administrative practices. It is hard to imagine how schools could continue to operate at even a basic level if the laws’ prohibitions were enforced to their full extent.”

The anti-equity, anti-inclusion, and anti-diversity law in New Hampshire became effective on July 1, 2025 after being signed into law by Governor Ayotte in late June. The groups who filed suit argue it radically contradicts federal civil rights laws that protect the rights of students with disabilities, violates the First Amendment rights of educators, and is unlawfully vague and ambiguous under the United States and New Hampshire Constitutions.

The Court recognized that it is impossible for schools to comply with both federal disability laws and the anti-DEI law, and that the state law is therefore unconstitutional. The court also observed that the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) “requires conduct that the anti-DEI laws forbid: classifying students based on disability in order to improve outcomes for students with disabilities.”

The law is already being enforced arbitrarily, as the Court explained: “The incongruity in enforcing the anti-DEI laws against private colleges and universities supported by state-funded scholarships, but not private K-12 schools supported by EFAs, demonstrates that the laws permit or encourage arbitrary enforcement based on an enforcement authority’s subjective preferences.”

Learn more about the case.

Devon Chaffee, Executive Director of the ACLU of New Hampshire, said, “This court victory could not come at a more critical time. Students across New Hampshire have the right to an inclusive education and educators in our state should not be threatened with vague laws that restrict their ability to meet the needs of their students. By continuing to block this unconstitutional law, the court has made clear that all students in the Granite State deserve equitable pathways to learn and thrive.”

The legal challenge was brought by the state’s largest educator union, National Education Association – New Hampshire (NEA-NH), four school districts (Oyster River Cooperative School District, the Dover School District, the Somersworth School District, and the Grantham School District), trainer and consultant for diversity, equity, and inclusion James M. McKim, Jr., diversity, equity, and inclusion administrator and psychology professor Dottie Morris, and New Hampshire Outright, a nonprofit that provides training in public schools and entities on creating environments of inclusion and belonging for LGBTQ+ students. Mr. McKim and Dr. Morris bring this case in their individual capacities.

They are represented by lawyers from a broad coalition of organizations and law firms, including the ACLU of New Hampshire, the national ACLU’s Disability Rights Program and Racial Justice Program, National Education Association-New Hampshire (NEA-NH), GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders (GLAD Law), and Drummond Woodsum & MacMahon.

Megan Tuttle, President of NEA-New Hampshire, stated: “This ruling affirms what we’ve always known: every student in New Hampshire deserves access to a high-quality public education in a safe, inclusive, and supportive environment. The anti-DEI language in HB 2 threatened that promise. Programs and instruction that reflect the values of diversity, equity, and inclusion are not just educationally sound, in many cases, they are legally required. Yet the vague and confusing language buried in the state budget sought to censor educators and restrict our ability to meet the needs of all students, including those who rely on special education services. New Hampshire’s educators will continue to stand firmly against unconstitutional political interference in our classrooms because we are committed to ensuring every child receives an appropriate education based on their individual needs and feels safe, valued, and fully prepared for the bright future they deserve. That’s the New Hampshire way.”

Heidi Carrington Heath, Executive Director of New Hampshire Outright, a plaintiff in the case, said, “The court’s decision to continue blocking this unjust law ensures that LGBTQ+ youth and their families can continue accessing safe school and community environments, fostered by well-respected, evidence-based training programs that many schools and public entities across the Granite State benefit from. Creating healthier and stronger environments for LGBTQ+ youth does so for everyone.”

James T. McKim, Jr., a plaintiff in the case and who works regularly with state and local government bodies to improve operations, including through diversity, equity, and inclusion practices, said, “The continued block on this harmful law means that organizations (including educational institutions) can continue improving their performance by exploring how to obtain the proven benefits of equitably including diverse people and perspectives – and that helps every Granite Stater.”

“I thank the court for continuing to block this law so that educators may adequately serve every single one of their students and create school environments that support learners from diverse lived experiences,” said Dottie Morris, a college administrator focusing on belonging and psychology professor, who is a plaintiff in this case. She is bringing suit only in her individual capacity.

Zoe Brennan-Krohn, Director of the ACLU Disability Rights Program, said, “The court saw this law for what it is: an expansive and illegal attack on the rights of students. This decision affirms that all New Hampshire students have an equal right to education, and that the state cannot undermine federal protections for disabled students.”

Hannah Hussey, Staff Attorney at GLAD Law, said, “Today the Court recognized that HB 2 unlawfully prevents initiatives that ensure equal educational access for all New Hampshire students. It protects the ability of New Hampshire educators and educational institutions to effectively prepare our students to live, work, and contribute to our communities. This includes providing trusted educational programs to help students learn to navigate differences respectfully—a practical skill in our diverse world. HB 2’s vague bans on programs related to race, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, and disability wrongfully prohibit efforts to provide equal educational opportunity for female students, LGBTQ students, students of color, and students with disabilities. It disadvantages all students and undermines our values of freedom and opportunity for all.”

Dr. Christine Boston, Superintendent of Dover Public Schools, said, “The Dover School District is committed to providing individualized, inclusive, and equitable education, as mandated by local and state policies. However, HB2’s vague restrictions on diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) efforts—especially those that involve recognizing student demographics—raise concerns that the District’s practices could be misinterpreted as violations, potentially risking vital state and federal funding.”

Dr. Robert Shaps, the Superintendent of the Oyster River Cooperative School District (ORCSD), said, “We are grateful and relieved that Chief Judge Landya B. McCafferty issued an injunction blocking this law as the case proceeds through the judicial system. This decision represents an important victory for New Hampshire students and their families. Judge McCafferty’s ruling reaffirms the state’s constitutional responsibility to provide adequate school funding without conditions. Schools should be a place where educators and students can exchange ideas and share different viewpoints as part of the learning experience.”

Christine Downing, the Superintendent of the Grantham School District, said, “The Grantham School District appreciates the Court’s decision to grant a preliminary injunction against the DEI prohibitions found in HB2. This decision recognizes the concerns regarding the law’s vague language and its potential chilling effect on our educational programming, as well as concerns regarding the law’s proposed unilateral and arbitrary loss of funding without providing a full understanding of what constitutes a violation. As a district, we remain committed to our mission to prepare students to thrive in a diverse, global world by honoring each other, valuing uniqueness, encouraging empathy, and fostering an inclusive environment where all our students – including those with disabilities and from diverse backgrounds – receive the support and education they are guaranteed under federal and state law. We will continue to monitor the ongoing litigation and look forward to further clarity as this critical case progresses.”

John Shea, the Superintendent of the Somersworth School District, said, “At a time when the rule of law is being trampled, by our very own government, it is heartening to receive this decision. The Somersworth School District is proud to stand up, with all of the other plaintiffs and our legal team, for the American values that are simply fundamental to universal public education. Moving forward, I’m desperately hopeful that this sort of distractive and destructive legislative gamesmanship will stop. We must find a way to come together – around some basic common ground — and move past all the divisive rhetoric and wasted time. Let’s get on with the important work of the noble American experiment. And let’s take good care of our kids – all of them.”

Learn more about NEA-NH v. Formella.

News

Home

GLAD Law Stands with Transgender Civil Rights Attorney Targeted by Federal Government

GLAD Law stands with Lambda Legal in the face of the federal government targeting transgender civil rights attorney Carl Charles.

GLAD Law Executive Director Ricardo Martinez said:

“It is chilling to witness the federal government weaponizing its power to criminally target a civil rights attorney. Robust civil rights litigation is essential to ensuring the continued strength of our constitutional protections. Intimidation has no place in our judicial system. Such tactics put liberty, dignity, and equality under the law at risk for all Americans.”

Blog

Home

The Resistance Brief: Where others fan fear, we show up for justice

Blog by Ricardo Martinez (he/him), Executive Director

My heart is heavy as I try to make sense of the moment we’re living in. There is a clear – and troubling – pattern of political violence in this country. From the attempted kidnapping of Governor Gretchen Whitmer to the January 6th attack on the U.S. Capitol, to the assassination of Minnesota House Speaker Melissa Hortman and her husband, to the murder of Charlie Kirk. Now, the deaths of Trey Reed and Corey Zukatis – both found hanging under suspicious circumstances in Mississippi – are a chilling reminder of the history of lawless violence in this country. These events, taken together, point to a climate of instability and unease that is difficult to ignore.

There’s no easy way to process it all. It’s like the temperature in the shower suddenly turned to full steam – overwhelming, blinding, disorienting. You know you must move, but it’s hard to see where.

Political violence is wrong. It doesn’t matter who it targets – it is a threat to all of us, to our democracy, and to any hope of shared justice. At the same time, it’s possible – and necessary – to hold more than one truth at once. It is possible to acknowledge that someone’s words cause harm to LGBTQ+ people, immigrants, and communities of color, and to stand firm in the commitment that we respond to those statements within the political and legal systems that are the foundation of our democracy.

Witnessing political leaders exploit this violence to divide us even further is heartbreaking. Using tragic events to stoke fear, amplify misinformation, and double down on policies that scapegoat our community is making things worse in this country, not better.

While others fan the flames of fear, we remain grounded in empathy, not cruelty. In law, not retaliation. In justice, not retribution. In peace, not passivity.

And the critical work we focus on in the courts is about more than legal battles – it’s about people: The teen who just wants to run track with her friends, a young person who deserves a therapist that helps, not harms, and families fighting every day for their kids’ right to exist openly, safely, and with dignity.

However tense and unpredictable the moment, we cannot sit idly by while our rights are debated in court, and our lives are scapegoated and offered as political bait in the public square. That’s why civil rights litigation remains essential – not only to stop harm but to affirm our dignity, our liberty, and our equality under the law.

As we head into the 2025-26 Supreme Court term, the legal and political landscape for LGBTQ people remains fraught – and deeply consequential.

This Supreme Court has agreed to hear three major cases directly impacting LGBTQ+ rights:

In Chiles v. Salazar, a licensed therapist in Colorado is challenging the state’s ban on conversion therapy for minors, claiming it violates her First Amendment rights. This law exists to protect LGBTQ+ youth from dangerous, discredited practices that shame young people, blame parents, and tear families apart to change something that can’t be changed – a person’s sexual orientation or gender identity.

What’s at stake is a state’s ability to protect LGBTQ+ youth from disproven “conversion therapy” practices that cause lasting trauma not just to individuals but to families and entire communities.

Hecox v. Little & B.P.J. v. West Virginia Board of Education are two pivotal cases about transgender girls’ equal participation in school. In Hecox v. Little, a transgender and a cisgender student are challenging Idaho’s 2020 law banning transgender girls from playing on girls’ sports teams – and allowing sex testing to enforce it. In B.P.J. v. West Virginia Board of Education, a teenage transgender girl is challenging her state’s ban under the Constitution’s Equal Protection Clause.

What’s at stake is whether states can ban trans students from participating in public life – and whether Title IX – and laws like it – protect LGBTQ+ people.

What’s happening in the courts is part of a much broader strategy – one that seeks to shrink the circle of who gets to be protected, cared for, or even acknowledged.

Let’s not sugarcoat what’s happening. Across the country, lawmakers are exploiting fear and ignorance to turn LGBTQ+ lives into lightning rods for political gain. They’re passing laws that criminalize accessing necessary care. They’re threatening therapists and doctors with prison. They’re making kids less safe because of who they are. And they continue to threaten to take away funding for HIV prevention and treatment – including programs that have saved countless lives among LGBTQ+ communities, communities of color, and people living in poverty.

We are living through a time of organized cruelty – but also extraordinary courage. Despite the climate and the risks, each day civil rights advocates, peaceful protestors, and everyday LGBTQ+ people throughout the country choose to show up. The fight for LGBTQ+ equality has never been easy. But every right we’ve won, we’ve earned through truth, solidarity, compassion, and relentless advocacy. Whatever the Court decides, we will continue to show up for our communities. We will fight to protect civil rights gains, engage with compassion and empathy, and build a just future together.

What to know, what to do:

Learn more about upcoming Supreme Court cases impacting LGBTQ+ rights at our Community Briefing featuring GLAD Law attorneys on October 9. Register today.
Read powerful stories from conversion therapy survivors featured in GLAD Law’s Chiles v. Salazar amicus brief (CW: religious and family trauma).
Learn how we’re fighting back against the Department of Education’s harmful proposed changes to the Public Service Loan Forgiveness Program.

Want to receive the Resistance Brief and other updates, action alerts, and event invitations in your email inbox?

Donate today to support GLAD Law’s work toward justice for all.

News

Home

LGBTQ+ Advocates Oppose Changes to the Public Service Loan Forgiveness Program

GLAD Law has submitted a comment to the U.S. Department of Education in opposition to a proposed change to the Public Service Loan Forgiveness (PSLF) Program. The proposed rule, which follows from a Trump administration executive order issued in March 2025, represents an attack on civil society and unlawful targeting of groups disfavored by the administration.

The Public Service Loan Forgiveness program was created by Congress in 2007 to encourage employment in public service. The program forgives the balance of a borrower’s regular student loan once they have made 10 years of payments while working at a qualifying public service entity, such as a government agency or non-profit organization.

The proposed rule creates a broad definition of “substantial illegal purpose” to sweep in a range of legal activities the administration does not like, and then provides the Secretary of Education with significant discretion to disqualify an employer from participating in the PSLF program based on that definition. Such potential arbitrary disqualification from the program would both make it more costly and difficult for employers to recruit and retain employees and steers student borrowers away from public service.

GLAD Law’s comment, submitted on behalf of multiple LGBTQ+ serving organizations, addresses the proposed rule’s definition of “substantial illegal purpose” to include providing certain medical treatments to transgender individuals under the age of 19, the purpose and effect of which is to further the administration’s targeting of transgender individuals and to make it more difficult for them to receive critical and lawful medical care.

GLAD Law is among 250 organizations submitting comments demanding that the Department of Education halt its weaponization of PSLF.

Read the Public Comment

GLAD Law’s comment was joined by the following organizations:

Advocates for Trans Equality (A4TE)
Equality California
Family Equality
GLSEN
Greater Boston PFLAG
Lambda Legal
LGBT Life Center
National Women’s Law Center
National Black Justice Collective (NBJC)
One Colorado
Our Family Coalition
OutFront Minnesota
Resource Center
SAGE
SpeakOUT Boston
The Center for HIV Law and Policy (CHLP)
The Trevor Project
Transhealth

Learn more about the proposed rule, its potential impact, and the organizations pushing back.

News

Home

LGBTQ+ Movement Leader Tony Hoang to Receive 2025 Spirit of Justice Award

As executive director of Equality California, Hoang is leading urgent, successful efforts to protect and expand LGBTQ+ rights in a hostile climate

Tony Hoang smiling in a blue blazer, white shirt, and floral tie with an Equality California lapel pin. — Tony Hoang, Executive Director of Equality California

New England-based GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders (GLAD Law), one of the nation’s leading LGBTQ+ legal rights organizations, will present its 2025 Spirit of Justice Award to Tony Hoang, executive director of Equality California (EQCA), for his visionary, influential, and intersectional leadership in the movement for LGBTQ+ equality. Hoang will receive the award at the Annual Spirit of Justice Award Dinner in Boston on November 6.

“Local leaders like Tony Hoang power the LGBTQ+ movement—working on the ground to identify needs in their communities, marshalling the resources to meet them through innovative programs and policy, and contributing to the playbook to expand protections and support for LGBTQ+ people around the country,” said Ricardo Martinez, GLAD Law’s Executive Director. “As leader of the country’s largest LGBTQ+ statewide civil rights organization, Tony brings the strategic leadership needed to fight the relentless attacks on our community, especially transgender and nonbinary youth. In a period of increasing political opposition to LGBTQ+ equality, Equality California has steadfastly worked to safeguard important civil rights protections for LGBTQ+ Californians. Tony’s leadership to proactively secure fairness, safety, and dignity for LGBTQ+ people shows us we can create opportunities to advance justice even in a hostile climate. We’re proud to honor him with this year’s Spirit of Justice Award.”

The Spirit of Justice Award recognizes individuals whose courage, vision, and impact embody the fight for justice.

Hoang has dedicated his career to advancing LGBTQ+ rights and has served as executive director of Equality California since 2021. His tenure with the organization dates to 2009, when he began as a field intern. He then held multiple roles including database and volunteer manager, director of operations, chief of staff, and managing director to his current position. The son of Vietnam War refugees, Hoang is the first Asian American person to lead ECQA, bringing with him an understanding of the marginalized intersections of sexuality, gender, race, and immigration status in the U.S. Under his leadership, ECQA has significantly boosted its budget, staff, and programming—particularly its advocacy and racial justice initiatives.

California has long been a leader in protecting LGBTQ+ rights and contributing to the national conversation on equality. In recent years, as anti-LGBTQ+ extremists across the country—and now with the full support of the Trump administration—have worked to undermine supportive policies—particularly for transgender and nonbinary youth, EQCA has prioritized efforts to shore up protections for LGBTQ+ Californians. They have worked to pass laws strengthening protections for LGBTQ+ students, protecting access to transgender and reproductive health care, ensuring safe and equitable access to homeless services, expediting the legal process for transgender people to obtain appropriate identity documents, and supporting LGBTQ families.

“It’s an honor to receive this recognition from GLAD Law, an organization that has spearheaded some of the boldest strategies and most significant advances in our movement to date, despite ever-present and powerful opposition,” said Tony Hoang. “With our democracy under strain and hard-won rights increasingly under attack, LGBTQ+ advocates across the country must continue to safeguard the gains we’ve made, model ways to make progress, and speak directly to the majority of Americans who believe everyone deserves equal opportunity, without discrimination, and who can help us expand protections for LGBTQ+ people regardless of the state where they live.”

In addition to leading EQCA, Hoang also serves on the board of the California Community Foundation.

Now in its 26th year, the Spirit of Justice Award Dinner is GLAD Law’s flagship event. Past Spirit of Justice Award recipients include Jennifer Finney Boylan, Kylar Broadus, Chai Feldblum, the plaintiffs in GLAD Law’s landmark Goodridge v. MA DPH marriage lawsuit, the Honorable Eric H. Holder Jr, Tony Kushner, Massachusetts Chief Justice Margaret H. Marshall, Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick and his family, Bishop Gene Robinson, Nadine Smith, Urvashi Vaid, and Phill Wilson. The 2024 honorees were Shannon Minter, legal director of the National Center for LGBTQ Rights; and Jennifer Levi, GLAD Law’s senior director of transgender and queer rights, two of the country’s foremost LGBTQ+ civil rights attorneys and experts on transgender rights litigation.

Learn more and get tickets

News

Home

Federal Court confirms that Boston Children’s Hospital does not have to comply with the Justice Department’s demand for information on transgender health care.

Boston Children’s Hospital asked the court to override the subpoena it received from the Department of Justice for private health care information on transgender patients. On September 10, 2025, the court issued a strong ruling in support of the hospital.

The Administration has been explicit about its disapproval of the transgender community and its aim to end GAC. The subpoena reflects those goals, comprising overbroad requests for documents and information seemingly unrelated to investigating fraud or unlawful off-label promotion. It is abundantly clear that the true purpose of issuing the subpoena is to interfere with the Commonwealth of Massachusetts’ right to protect GAC within its borders, to harass and intimidate BCH to stop providing such care, and to dissuade patients from seeking such care. For the above reasons, I find that the Government has failed to show proper purpose and, even if it had, that BCH has demonstrated that the subpoena was issued for an improper purpose, motivated only by bad faith.
United States District Court of Massachusetts

GLAD Law celebrates this decision. This ruling is a win in protecting patients’ and their families’ private health care information. Ricardo Martinez, Executive Director of GLAD Law, reflects:

This important ruling protects the private health care information of patients and their families. It is a powerful example of the courts’ critical role in guarding against government overreach and ensuring the federal government does not unlawfully interfere with the Commonwealth’s right to protect transgender health care in Massachusetts and to set rules for public health within its borders.

Learn more about the Department of Justice’s subpoenas for information on transgender health care in an MSNBC interview with Jennifer Levi, GLAD Law’s Senior Director for Transgender and Queer Rights.