In the aftermath of a tragic shooting at Annunciation Catholic School in Minneapolis on August 27, 2025, the United States finds itself embroiled in a heated debate over gun rights, mental health, and the treatment of transgender Americans. The attack, carried out by 23-year-old Robin Westman—a transgender woman and former student—claimed the lives of two children, wounded 17 more, and ended with Westman taking her own life. This incident, along with the 2023 shooting at The Covenant School in Nashville by Audrey Hale, another transgender individual, has reignited longstanding tensions over how best to prevent such violence, and what role, if any, gender identity should play in these discussions.
According to CNN and The Independent, senior officials in President Trump’s Department of Justice are now considering a proposal to restrict transgender Americans from possessing firearms. The discussions, described as preliminary, are a marked departure from the administration’s earlier pledges to be staunch defenders of the Second Amendment. A Justice Department official told CNN that the goal is "to ensure that mentally ill individuals suffering from gender dysphoria are unable to obtain firearms while they are unstable and unwell." The official added, "The DOJ is actively evaluating options to prevent the pattern of violence we have seen from individuals with specific mental health challenges and substance abuse disorders." However, the spokesperson was clear: "No specific criminal justice proposals have been advanced at this time."
These developments come amid a broader pattern of Trump administration policies targeting transgender Americans. Since taking office, President Trump has issued executive orders erasing federal recognition of trans people, restricting access to gender-affirming healthcare, banning transgender athletes from women’s sports, and removing thousands of transgender service members from the military. The Pentagon, for instance, has maintained that "the medical, surgical and mental health constraints on individuals who have a current diagnosis or history of, or exhibit symptoms consistent with, gender dysphoria are incompatible with the high mental and physical standards necessary for military service," according to a Defense Department memo cited by The Independent.
Gun rights, meanwhile, have long been a political third rail, especially for conservatives. Attorney General Pam Bondi reaffirmed the administration’s commitment earlier this year, writing to all Justice Department employees, "For too long, the Second Amendment, which establishes the fundamental individual right of Americans to keep and bear arms, has been treated as a second-class right. No more. It is the policy of this Department of Justice to use its full might to protect the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens."
Yet the proposal to restrict gun rights for transgender individuals is being seriously considered. Justice Department leadership is exploring whether it can use its rulemaking authority to declare that people with gender dysphoria—a condition recognized in the American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM)—are mentally ill, and thus can be barred from possessing firearms. Federal law, however, requires a judge to determine if a person is mentally "defective" or has been "committed to a mental institution" before stripping them of their gun rights.
This legal nuance is not lost on critics. Alejandra Caraballo, a clinical instructor at Harvard Law School, warned CNN that such a move could set a dangerous precedent: "This precedent being used against trans people could be used against veterans with PTSD. It’s a slippery slope to make anyone lose their 2nd amendment rights." The advocacy group GLAAD echoed these concerns, with a spokesperson telling CNN, "Instead of actual solutions, the administration is again choosing to scapegoat and target a small and vulnerable population." GLAAD emphasized that transgender people comprise less than 2% of the US population but are four times as likely to be victims of crime.
Statistics from the Gun Violence Archive, cited by CNN, further undermine the narrative linking transgender identity to mass violence. Of the more than 5,700 mass shootings in America since January 2013, only five shooters were confirmed as transgender. The overwhelming majority of mass attacks are committed by cisgender men. In fact, as The Independent notes, transgender people are more than four times as likely to be victims, not perpetrators, of violent crimes including rape and sexual assault.
Still, the tragic shootings in Nashville and Minneapolis have fueled right-wing outrage and conspiracy theories, with some conservative media figures insisting that gender dysphoria itself should be grounds for restricting gun rights. The argument, as articulated by supporters of the proposed ban, is that individuals struggling with gender identity and undergoing hormone treatments are at greater risk of instability. Critics of this perspective, however, argue that such claims are not supported by data and merely serve to stigmatize an already marginalized group.
At the state level, the policy landscape is equally fraught. New York Governor Kathy Hochul has pushed through the so-called "ERA" amendment, which allows minors to undergo sex changes without parental consent. After the Buffalo shooting, Hochul also banned body armor and raised the legal age for gun purchases. Yet, as some commentators point out, New York’s "Raise the Age" law has made it harder to hold minors accountable for illegal gun possession, a contradiction that has drawn criticism from both sides of the debate.
Amid these policy battles, the broader question remains: How should society balance the need to prevent gun violence with the rights and dignity of transgender Americans? Progressives argue that focusing on gender identity distracts from the real drivers of mass shootings—namely, mental health crises and easy access to firearms for those who should not have them. Conservatives, meanwhile, contend that ignoring the potential risks associated with rapid social transitions and untreated mental health issues is reckless.
The Justice Department’s move to subpoena medical records from clinics providing gender-affirming care to minors further highlights the administration’s aggressive approach. According to CNN, one subpoena demanded sensitive information from the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, including patient data such as birthdays, social security numbers, and addresses. These actions have alarmed advocates, who see them as part of a broader campaign to roll back transgender rights under the guise of public safety.
In the end, the debate over gun rights and transgender Americans is about far more than firearms. It is a window into the nation’s deepest anxieties about identity, safety, and the role of government in regulating both. As the Department of Justice weighs its next steps, the country is left to grapple with the consequences—intended and otherwise—of policies that seek to balance individual rights with collective security.
This moment, marked by tragedy and political division, is forcing Americans to confront hard questions about who is protected, who is targeted, and what kind of society we want to be. The answers, as ever, will shape the lives of millions and echo far beyond the headlines.
