In a tumultuous week for LGBTQ rights and American politics, the nation was rocked by a series of landmark legal battles, policy reversals, and a high-profile assassination that underscored the increasingly fraught landscape for transgender and queer communities. From the halls of the Supreme Court to university campuses and the Pentagon, the events of early September 2025 painted a portrait of a country deeply divided over issues of equality, healthcare, and civil liberties.
On September 8, 2025, three military families took the unprecedented step of suing the Department of Defense in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland. Their lawsuit challenges the Trump administration’s sweeping ban on transgender-related medical care coverage under Department of Defense health insurance plans. The ban, which has drawn fierce criticism from civil rights advocates, prohibits military clinics and hospitals from providing continuing care to transgender adolescent and adult children. It also prevents TRICARE, the military’s health insurance program, from covering the costs of gender-affirming care—no matter where that care is received.
According to a press release from the families’ legal team—GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders (GLAD Law), the National Center for Lesbian Rights (NCLR), Brown, Goldstein & Levy, LLP, and Keker, Van Nest & Peters LLP—the plaintiffs are proceeding under pseudonyms to protect their privacy and safety. Sarah Austin, Staff Attorney at GLAD Law, stated, “This is a sweeping reversal of military health policy and a betrayal of military families who have sacrificed for our country. When a servicemember is deployed and focused on the mission, they deserve to know their family is taken care of. This Administration has backtracked on that core promise and put servicemembers at risk of losing access to health care their children desperately need.”
Shannon Minter, Legal Director at NCLR, added, “President Trump has illegally overstepped his authority by abruptly cutting off necessary medical care for military families. This lawless directive is part of a dangerous pattern of this administration ignoring legal requirements and abandoning our servicemembers.” The lawsuit marks a significant escalation in the ongoing struggle between LGBTQ advocates and the federal government over access to essential healthcare for transgender Americans.
Meanwhile, on September 10, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a brief but impactful order in another flashpoint of the culture wars. The Court ruled that a transgender boy in South Carolina may use the boy’s bathroom in his public high school while pursuing a legal challenge to a state law requiring students to use bathrooms corresponding to their sex assigned at birth. The unsigned order, which applied only to the student in question, made clear that it was “not a ruling on the merits of the legal issues presented in the litigation” but rather based on “the standards applicable for obtaining emergency relief.”
Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, and Neil Gorsuch dissented, though they did not provide any explanation for their opposition. The decision comes as the Supreme Court is preparing to hear two high-stakes cases involving trans athletes and their rights to participate in sports under Title IX, the federal civil rights law that prohibits discrimination based on sex in educational programs and activities that receive federal funding. Advocates worry these upcoming cases could further erode legal protections for transgender students and set new precedents with far-reaching consequences.
The Supreme Court’s action is the latest in a series of conflicting decisions on transgender rights. In 2020, the Court ruled in Bostock v. Clayton County that federal law prohibits anti-trans discrimination in employment. Yet, in June 2025, the Court upheld a Tennessee law banning gender-affirming care for trans minors (U.S. v. Skrmetti), signaling a willingness to allow states to restrict access to such care and raising concerns about the future of broader LGBTQ protections.
Against this backdrop of legal and political turmoil, tragedy struck at Utah Valley University on September 10, 2025. Charlie Kirk, a prominent right-wing political activist and outspoken opponent of LGBTQ rights, was assassinated while addressing a crowd at the university’s Turning Point USA chapter. Kirk, who was just 31, was shot in the neck by a gunman positioned about 200 yards away, moments after responding to an audience question about transgender Americans and mass shootings. The FBI is now offering a $100,000 reward for information leading to the arrest of Kirk’s killer, who remains at large.
President Donald Trump responded swiftly to Kirk’s death, announcing at a Pentagon remembrance ceremony on September 11 that he would posthumously award Kirk the Presidential Medal of Freedom. “Charlie was a giant of his generation, a champion of liberty, and an inspiration to millions and millions of people,” Trump declared. Kirk’s legacy as the founder of Turning Point USA and his role in mobilizing conservative youth—especially during Trump’s 2024 presidential campaign—have made him a martyr for many on the right. His vehement opposition to LGBTQ rights, particularly transgender healthcare and same-sex marriage, was a central part of his political identity. Kirk often invoked “Christian values” to justify his positions and used incendiary rhetoric against LGBTQ people, frequently calling for the rollback of hard-won rights and referring to transgender individuals and their supporters as “sick.”
Reactions to Kirk’s assassination have been mixed. LGBTQ advocacy organizations, while condemning the violence, also pointed to the dangers of political rhetoric that demonizes marginalized groups. Kelley Robinson, president of the Human Rights Campaign, said in a statement, “Political violence is unacceptable and has no place in this country. We cannot ever accept this epidemic of gun violence as normal.” Kristen Browde, president of the Florida LGBTQ+ Democratic Caucus, added, “Political violence, for any reason, is wrong. Gun violence, for any reason, is wrong. Spending your life, inciting violence, demonizing political opponents? Attacking those who are different? Every bit as wrong. And when violence follows such actions? One can’t be shocked. All you can do is recommit yourself to fight against it.”
The events of this week highlight the precarious position of LGBTQ rights in America, especially for transgender individuals. An appeals court ruling reported on September 12, 2025, was described by one judge as creating a “lower-class citizenship” for transgender people, as Anna Lange, a transgender woman, was ordered to go to trial to prove her employer discriminated against her by excluding coverage for gender transition. The legal and political battles continue to escalate, with advocates on all sides preparing for further fights in the courts, legislatures, and the public square.
As the nation grapples with these developments, the future of LGBTQ rights—especially for transgender Americans—remains uncertain, with each new court decision, legislative act, and public tragedy shaping the contours of the struggle for equality and dignity.