In just a few days under President Donald Trump’s renewed tenure, a wave of anxiety rippled across the transgender and nonbinary community. That fear reached a zenith on Tuesday, when an executive order—purportedly aimed at “protecting women from gender ideology extremism”—declared that the federal government would recognize only two sexes: male and female, and would not include or recognize gender identity. Yet, rather than concede defeat, a growing chorus of voices—state leaders, advocates, legal experts, and grassroots activists—has mobilized to challenge what they see as an unprecedented threat to transgender rights.
A Swift Rollback of Existing Protections
On Tuesday, President Trump signed an executive order that left LGBTQ+ organizations sounding alarms. In language that critics argue discounts scientific evidence and the lived experiences of transgender people, the order proclaimed that only two sexes exist—male and female—and that “these sexes are not changeable and are grounded in fundamental and incontrovertible reality.”
Among the order’s immediate implications:
- All federal documents—passports, visas, and other government-issued ID—will classify individuals solely as male or female.
- Federal agencies will be required to enforce this two-gender definition in their programs.
- Taxpayer funds cannot be used for most gender-affirming health care.
- Transgender women will be denied placement in women’s shelters, prisons, or detention centers.
In his inaugural speech, President Trump defended the order, characterizing policies promoting transgender inclusion as “social engineering” and declaring a vision of a “colorblind” and strictly “merit-based” society. “As of today,” he asserted, “it will henceforth be the official policy of the United States government that there are only two genders, male and female.”
Advocacy groups, constitutional scholars, and attorneys general across multiple states have been quick to respond with the message that this directive flies in the face of both evolving law and established constitutional principles.
The Resistance Begins
Among the first to denounce the order was New York Attorney General Letitia James, who vowed to safeguard transgender and nonbinary New Yorkers. “President Trump can try to attack the transgender and nonbinary communities with directives and orders,” James wrote on social media platform X (formerly Twitter), “but in New York, you have the right to be who you are. I’ll always protect that right.”
Her statement was widely praised by LGBTQ+ advocates, who celebrated it as a sign that state governments could help fill the void of federal protection if the new administration continues to push its stringent, two-sex definition. “This is a high-profile stand,” said one New York-based activist. “AG James is showing we have powerful allies who won’t be bullied by discriminatory federal orders.”
James’s office has long been vocal on LGBTQ+ issues, taking on cases related to housing discrimination, employment fairness, and more. Her message was clear: any attempt from the federal government to erode state-level protections would be challenged in court.
David Schultz, a constitutional law professor at Hamline University, explained the interplay between federal orders and state laws. While this executive order threatens to override many federal guidelines that were previously trans-inclusive, Schultz emphasized that it might not supersede more protective state legislation.
“Trump cannot issue an executive order, and Congress cannot overrule the states on this,” Schultz said. “This is a basic matter of federalism—states have the right to pass legislation that offers more protections than the federal government.”
According to Schultz, the order might still alter federal benefits for government employees and prompt restrictions on how federal funds are allocated. Nevertheless, it will face considerable legal scrutiny, and the possibility of a protracted court battle looms. “The specifics of this order are almost certainly heading to the courts,” Schultz noted. “It will probably take months—if not years—to be fully resolved.”
Minnesota Representative Leigh Finke underscored this state-federal conflict, pointing out that Minnesota law includes “widespread transgender protections.” She described the order as incompatible with laws that have already recognized a spectrum of gender identities in her state. “There is no other thing for us to do except organize, use the law, use public opinion, and fight against this movement. Otherwise, we’re done for,” Finke said, reflecting the urgency many transgender Minnesotans feel.
Maryland Attorney General Anthony Brown issued his own statement on Tuesday, calling the new executive order a direct threat. “Make no mistake: this Executive Order threatens people’s lives,” he wrote, emphasizing how it contradicts medical consensus on transgender care and human rights. “This is a decision that ignores the humanity and reality of transgender Americans across our State and nation.”
Both officials’ remarks echo a growing sentiment that, while federal guidelines have changed drastically, states themselves will remain a protective shield for transgender residents.
Kelley Robinson, president of the Human Rights Campaign (HRC)—the country’s largest LGBTQ+ advocacy group—issued a resounding response. “The incoming administration is trying to divide our communities in the hope that we forget what makes us strong,” she said in a statement. “But we refuse to back down or be intimidated. We are not going anywhere, and we will fight back against these harmful provisions with everything we’ve got.”
That determined stance mirrored sentiments expressed by other advocacy groups. Ash Orr, spokesperson for Advocates for Trans Equality, told the Associated Press that the group would “persevere” in ensuring protection for transgender Americans. “We’re going to continue in our work and we’re going to continue to protect trans rights throughout the country,” Orr stated.
Such vows aren’t just lip service. Both the HRC and smaller, grassroots organizations are already planning court challenges and public campaigns. Fundraising efforts are being ramped up, volunteer networks are mobilizing, and activists are calling for sustained engagement from allies—everyone from parents and families to corporate sponsors who can help provide a financial backbone for the fight.
Signs of grassroots activism aren’t limited to high-profile advocacy groups or state attorneys general. Cincinnati-based attorney Sol Kersey, who is transgender and uses they/them pronouns, made the bold decision to run for Cincinnati City Council in direct response to the new administration’s policies. In a press release, Kersey described being “tired of being tired” and “tired of our existence being politicized.”
“I decided to do something about it,” Kersey announced, revealing that they have the support of LPAC, an organization that backs LGBTQ women and nonbinary candidates who champion social justice and women’s equality. While local politics might seem far removed from federal executive orders, Kersey’s campaign is a reminder that people are pushing back on every level, from city councils to attorney general offices, to secure trans rights and visibility.
“It’s about realizing that my community and I deserve better representation,” Kersey said in a live-streamed video. “If I can help rewrite the policies in my city to protect marginalized folks, I’m going to do it. And if more trans people across the country run for office, we can shape policy from within.”
Representative Sarah McBride, the newly elected transgender representative from Deleware, perhaps summarized the spirit of resistance best: “No executive action, no legislative action for that matter, can erase the reality of diversity across gender in our society.” She noted that the practical impact of Trump’s order remains uncertain, though it could have serious ramifications for privacy, identification documents, and federal programs.
“These threats make it even more critical for all of us—transgender people, allies, states, and advocacy groups—to remain vigilant,” McBride added. “We must continue fighting for an inclusive vision of this country.”
The Bottom Line
Though it has only been a few days since the new administration took office, the rollback of protections for transgender Americans has ignited fierce resistance. From the courts to the ballot box, from large civil rights organizations to local community leaders, advocates are positioning themselves for what many see as a pivotal, four-year fight.
Beneath the tension runs a current of hope: the recognition that new allies are emerging every day, and that state-level safeguards and legal frameworks already in place can serve as powerful buffers. The broad-based response—from New York to Minnesota, Maryland to Ohio—indicates that millions of Americans still firmly believe in the right of transgender and nonbinary individuals to live free from discrimination.
The Human Rights Campaign and others insist that this is a moment to raise our voices, not retreat in fear. “We will not go away,” they affirm. For transgender people worried about healthcare, legal protections, and simple day-to-day acceptance, these statements are not just talking points—they’re a pledge that the community has a phalanx of defenders ready for a protracted struggle.
As Rep. Leigh Finke put it, “We can’t give up. We have to fight like our lives depend on it—because for many of us, they do.” This unwavering resolve, combined with growing support from political and legal allies, illustrates that while the road ahead may be fraught with challenges, it will also be marked by resilience and solidarity. Transgender Americans do not stand alone.
