President Joe Biden started his presidency with a commitment to safeguarding the rights of transgender Americans against Republican measures that characterize them as harmful to children and aim to marginalize their presence in public life.
In his inaugural State of the Union address in 2021, he reassured transgender individuals, declaring, “Your president has your back.” This sentiment was echoed in his later speeches, affirming his administration’s support for the community.
Concerns, however, have emerged regarding whether Biden’s administration has taken sufficient measures to protect trans individuals, especially with the imminent presidency of Donald Trump, who has been vocal about his intention to reverse protections for transgender people.
Trump announced an official policy that recognizes only two genders—male and female—and expressed plans to enact executive orders early in his presidency that would directly affect transgender people.
Biden and the Democratic party are currently facing challenges in navigating transgender issues, particularly given that GOP strategy successfully utilized Democratic support for transgender rights to regain power in the White House and Congress. Vice President Kamala Harris’s campaign notably seldom referenced transgender issues, and GOP advertisements criticized her, suggesting she prioritized gender identity over economic matters.
The now-infamous Trump campaign ad, declaring “Kamala is for they/them; President Trump is for you,” encapsulated this messaging that resonated with many voters.
As his term came to a close, Biden worked on halting proposed protections for transgender student-athletes and endorsed legislation that limits coverage for transgender medical treatments for children of military personnel.
Such moves align with a typical approach seen in outgoing administrations, hastily implementing or abandoning policies to hinder the incoming president’s ability to enact a different agenda. However, many transgender individuals are questioning why Biden initially postponed plans that could have enhanced their protection against potential Trump-era policies.
Imara Jones, a transgender woman and creator of “The Anti-Trans Hate Machine” podcast, pointed out that while the Biden administration has made some commitments to support transgender people, they fall short of expectations given the current anti-trans climate. Notably, Biden appointed transgender individuals to prominent roles within his administration, reversed Trump’s ban on transgender individuals serving in the military, and allowed non-binary citizens to select an “X” gender marker on passports.
White House spokesperson Kelly Scully remarked that, “Under President Biden’s leadership, we have remedied historical injustices and advanced equality for the community, but there is more work to do, and we hope that work continues after he leaves office.”
Biden’s Justice Department has actively contested laws in states like Tennessee and Alabama that restrict gender-affirming medical care for transgender youth and has submitted statements of interest in related cases.
Despite this, Jones emphasized that significant gaps remain, highlighting failures in enforcing Title IX, defending trans healthcare, and tackling anti-trans violence. “The list goes on,” she stated, pointing out that proactive measures could still be implemented to protect the transgender community, even temporarily.
Some LGBTQ+ advocates have expressed disappointment with Biden for signing the annual defense bill, which included clauses limiting military healthcare for transgender children, despite his objections. The largest organization representing LGBTQ+ members of the military stated that this move contradicts his claim of leading the most pro-LGBTQ+ administration in U.S. history.
Kelley Robinson, president of the Human Rights Campaign, noted that this law is the first federal measure targeting LGBTQ+ individuals since the Defense of Marriage Act was enacted in the 1990s. Bill Clinton, the president who signed it, later expressed regret over that decision.
Across the nation, 26 states have put provisions in place restricting or banning gender-affirming healthcare for transgender minors, with most facing legal challenges. While some federal judges have deemed such bans unconstitutional, others, like in Florida, have paused the ruling, and a temporary block exists against a ban in Montana. Furthermore, 25 states have laws prohibiting transgender women and girls from participating in designated women’s sports, though courts have temporarily halted enforcement in states like Arizona, Idaho, and Utah.
In 2023, when Biden proposed his now-withdrawn initiative to prohibit outright bans on transgender student-athletes, advocates criticized it as inadequate, arguing it still allowed individual schools to bar athletes from competing in accordance with their gender identity. This plan was intended to follow a broader civil rights extension under Title IX supporting LGBTQ+ students but encountered multiple delays. Many viewed these postponements as politically motivated amidst an election year, particularly as Republican opposition to trans athletes gained traction. If the rule had been finalized, it likely would have faced a wave of legal challenges from conservative groups, similar to those that blocked the broader Title IX protections from being implemented in numerous states.
