Opinions
Equality Act is the LGBT rights bill we need
Trans, LGBT movements stronger and better connected than ever
(Washington Blade file photo by Michael Key)
In 1974, the Equality Act was introduced to add sexual orientation throughout the 1964 Civil Rights Act. Twenty years later, for various political reasons, the bill was stripped down to be only an employment rights bill and renamed ENDA, the Employment Non-Discrimination Act. ENDA has been the centerpiece federal legislation ever since—although gender identity was excluded from the act until 2007. And this week, we are very pleased to announce that ENDA is being replaced with the Equality Act, a more comprehensive bill that when passed will offer protection in employment, housing, public accommodations, and four other areas.
NCTE has advocated for over ten years for refocusing on a comprehensive bill more akin to the original Equality Act. The most notable difference between the Equality Act and its 1974 namesake is that it includes both gender identity and sexual orientation—and unlike in 2007, removing gender identity is now completely unthinkable.
Here’s what you may want to know.
- The Equality Act will be introduced this Thursday, July 23 by Senator Jeff Merkley (D-OR) in the U.S. Senate and Rep. Cicilline (D-RI) in the U.S. House of Representatives, along with many co-sponsors: Senators Tammy Baldwin, and Cory Booker, and Representatives Nancy Pelosi, and John Lewis. They will be joined by a large number of co-sponsors.
- The bill will explicitly prohibit discrimination based on gender identity and sexual orientation in employment, housing, education, credit, public accommodations, jury service, and federally funded programs. (Gender identity and sexual orientation are defined the same way they were in ENDA.)
- The bill will also codify the existing interpretations of sexual orientation and gender identity bias as being forms of sex discrimination, which many courts and federal agencies including the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission have already embraced. Think of it as wearing both a belt and suspenders. So for instance, if a trans person is discriminated against in their job, it will be clearly illegal as both gender identity discrimination and sex discrimination. This is important for various reasons, including that it will help cement these interpretations under various other laws not directly amended by the bill.
- Interestingly, the types of businesses considered to be public accommodations would be expanded by the Equality Act, not only for sexual orientation but also for the existing categories of race, color, religion, and national origin. Additionally, the category of sex would be added to the public accommodations section of the Civil Rights Act for the first time, greatly advancing women’s rights.
- In the same way the law protects people on the basis of their race and religion, the Equality Act will make clear that discrimination because someone is (or is perceived to be) LGBT, or is a parent, child, partner, or otherwise associated with someone who is LGBT–is also illegal.
- Whereas ENDA would have created a new law specific to LGBT people, the Equality Act will add LGBT protections to existing civil rights laws like the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Fair Housing Act, the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, and the Jury Selection and Service Act. It is being done this way to ensure that LGBT people are protected equally compared to other marginalized groups that are already protected.
- No special religious exemptions would apply for discrimination against LGBT people. Amending existing civil rights laws means that the religious exemptions that have been in place for fifty years will remain in place. Mainly this means that religious institutions can continue to prefer individuals of their own faith.
This bill was written to address the real discrimination that LGBT people face in real life—discrimination that is often pervasive in the workplace but goes far beyond it. And while a bill can always change as it moves through the legislative process, we need to stake a claim and introduce a bill that really is what we need. That is what the Equality Act is.
Passing the Equality Act will probably take time, and there are things you can do to help. First, contact your Representative and your two U.S. Senators and ask them to co-sponsor the Equality Act. Remember, support for LGBT people is changing quickly, So even if your members of Congress haven’t supported LGBT equality in the past, contact them anyway—their stance may be evolving.
Second, we need to make sure Congress and the public understand that anti-LGBT discrimination is very real—which means we need your stories. Next month, NCTE will launch the 2015 U.S. Trans Survey—the biggest survey yet of trans people in the United States. This survey, a follow-up to the National Transgender Discrimination Survey conducted six years ago, will clearly make the case for the Equality Act along with all of our other efforts to improve the lives of trans people.
A final word: We all know that getting any legislation through a very polarized Congress is really hard right now. But we also know that the transgender and LGBT movements are stronger and better connected than ever. So, though we can’t say that we see a clear pathway to pass the Equality Act through the current Congress, we know that the politics of LGBT equality are shifting in our favor. When the original Equality Act was first introduced more than four decades ago, its passage may have seemed to some like a pipe dream. Today, it is not. The promise of Equality Act is still urgently needed. The question is how quickly we can hasten its inevitable passage.
Mara Keisling is executive director of the National Center for Transgender Equality.
A right does not need to be banned to be restricted. Sometimes it only needs to be made uncertain.
That is what emerges from a closer examination of adoption access for same-sex couples across different countries. There is no broad legal rollback. What appears instead is a more subtle pattern: rights that remain on paper but become fragile, conditional, and uneven in practice.
Italy provides a clear example.
Since 2023, under the government of Giorgia Meloni, administrative decisions have limited the automatic recognition of both mothers in female same-sex couples, particularly in cases involving assisted reproduction abroad. In practice, many families have been forced into additional legal proceedings to validate relationships already established.
At the same time, Italy has intensified its opposition to surrogacy, extending penalties even to those who pursue it outside the country. Human rights organizations have warned that these measures disproportionately affect LGBTQ families, particularly male couples.
The judiciary, however, has pushed back.
In 2025, the Constitutional Court ruled that a non-biological mother cannot be excluded from legal recognition when there is a shared parental project. It also removed a long-standing restriction that prevented single individuals from accessing international adoption.
Italy has not eliminated these rights. But it has made them unstable.
When a right depends on litigation, judicial timelines, or shifting interpretations, it is no longer fully guaranteed.
In the United States, the structure differs, but the outcome converges.
At the federal level, same-sex couples can adopt. Yet the system varies widely across states.
Data from the Movement Advancement Project show that while some states explicitly prohibit discrimination in adoption, others provide no clear protections. In several states, licensed agencies can refuse to work with same-sex couples based on religious objections.
Access, therefore, is shaped not only by law, but by geography, institutions, and applied standards.
Research from the Williams Institute further complicates the narrative. Same-sex couples adopt and foster children at higher rates than different-sex couples.
The contradiction is clear.
Child welfare is invoked, yet the pool of available families is reduced. Faith is cited, yet it is used as a filter within publicly funded systems.
The consequences are tangible
children remain longer in care
processes become more complex
families face unequal scrutiny
What is happening in Italy and the United States is not isolated. Across parts of Europe, conservative governments have advanced legal frameworks that reinforce traditional definitions of family while limiting recognition of diverse ones.
Adoption is not always addressed directly. But the impact accumulates.
Options are restricted while the language of protection is used to justify it.
There is no need to soften it.
This is not only a debate about family models. It is a decision about who is recognized as family and who must continue asking for permission.
That is not neutral.
It is political.
And when a right depends on where you live, who evaluates you, or how hard you are willing to fight for it, that right is already being weakened.
Opinions
ROSENSTEIN: Chavous for Democratic D.C. Council-at-Large
Committed to fighting for statehood for our 700,000 residents
Kevin Chavous said, “I’m running for D.C. Council At-Large because Washingtonians deserve leadership focused on improving their everyday quality of life. Throughout my career, I’ve worked on the practical business of city government, and public policy, focused on solving real problems, and making government work better for the people it serves.”
Kevin’s experience spans safer streets, affordable housing, early education and school readiness, workforce and economic opportunity, support for seniors, and the day-to-day operations of city government. The knowledge he brings to the office is grounded in experience, clear-eyed oversight, and a commitment to delivering results. His platform outlines his priorities and approach, but as he has said, “it’s not the end of the conversation. I believe the best solutions come from listening and working together.”
Kevin believes safe streets are the foundation of strong neighborhoods. He is committed to having Washingtonians feel secure in their neighborhoods, and working to ensure all public safety efforts are smart, fair, and effective. To Kevin that means an approach focusing on enforcement that works, prevention that matters, and a range of services to stop crime before it happens. Kevin supports smart, effective policing, with a focus on violent crime, and getting repeat offenders off the streets. To do this he will work to strengthen community policing with the aim of rebuilding trust in every community, which will improve neighborhood-level safety. He will introduce legislation to expand targeted mental health and crisis-response services. The goal again, to prevent violence before it occurs. He will work to see government coordinates youth diversion, workforce, and support programs, which can intervene early, and reduce recidivism.
Kevin understands housing stability is essential for families, seniors, and workers, to stay and thrive in D.C. His housing priorities focus on increasing the supply of affordable housing, helping people build long-term stability in the neighborhoods they call home. He will work to increase the affordable housing supply through zoning updates, ADUs, and adaptive reuse of vacant properties. He will submit legislation to strengthen programs that help first-time, and longtime homeowners, buy and then stay in their homes. He will work to expand permanent supportive housing and targeted rental assistance for vulnerable residents, and protect tenants ensuring housing laws are enforced clearly, and consistently.
Kevin believes “every child should enter school ready to learn, with the support needed to succeed from day one. Early investment pays lifelong dividends – for families and for the District.” He will work on the Council to expand early childhood education, and school-readiness programs, citywide. He supports quality and affordable childcare for all children, birth to three, including seeing students begin the school year healthy, by supporting access to medical and dental screenings for all children.
Kevin knows economic opportunity allows families and communities to thrive. He will fight to see D.C.’s growth creates real pathways to good jobs, strong local businesses, and long-term stability for residents in every ward. His approach connects workforce training, worker protections, and neighborhood investment, so that growth benefits the people who live here. He will work to expand job training, apprenticeships, and career pipelines tied to high-demand fields, including construction, healthcare, and infrastructure. He will fight to strengthen First Source and local hiring requirements, so D.C. residents benefit directly from major development projects such as the new RFK site. He will demand the government protect workers by enforcing wage, safety, and labor standards, and holding bad actors accountable. He will introduce legislation to invest more in neighborhood-based economic development, including small businesses, BIDs, and commercial-to-residential revitalization.
Kevin has spoken out for the seniors in our city saying, “seniors built this city – and D.C. must ensure they can age with dignity, security, and independence.” Kevin will work to expand property tax relief and housing supports, so seniors can age in place. He will work with the AG to strengthen protections against fraud, exploitation, and predatory practices targeting seniors. He will support and work to expand nutrition, transportation, and community-based programs, that reduce the isolation many seniors face.
Kevin’s experience working for the Council, in the oversight role he had, gives him a practical understanding of what works, what doesn’t, and how to fix it – without delay. He will use that experience as he works to strengthen agency oversight to ensure laws are implemented as intended, and to improve service delivery by fixing bottlenecks, and outdated processes. Ensuring clear standards and accountability in inspections, enforcement, and permitting. Kevin will demand government use technology responsibly to improve efficiency, while protecting residents from fraud and abuse.
For all these reasons and more, I support Kevin Chavous. The more includes the fact Kevin has spoken out clearly, about the need to fight the antisemitism, Islamophobia, racism, sexism and homophobia, all once again rearing their ugly heads in our society. He will fight to keep ICE out of our city, and to keep immigrants safe. He is committed to fighting for statehood for the 700,000 residents of the District of Columbia, while fighting for budget and legislative autonomy as we work toward statehood.
Again, I urge the voters of D.C. to cast their ballot for Kevin Chavous for DC Council-at-Large.
Peter Rosenstein is a longtime LGBTQ rights and Democratic Party activist.
The state of Tennessee has a long history of political discrimination against its 225,000 LGBTQ citizens. In 2019, a district attorney remarked that gay people should not receive domestic violence protections, and in 2023, for five months in Murfreesboro, homosexual acts in public were illegal, prompting a federal judge to have the ordinance removed.
In 2022, I briefly lived in Tennessee and played rugby with the LGBTQ-inclusive Nashville Grizzlies, who welcomed me with open arms as an ally, teaching me that rugby isn’t always about winning or losing – it’s about creating a safe, inclusive, and joyful space for people looking to feel welcome.
In Tennessee, where 87% of the LGBTQ community has experienced workplace discrimination, and where, each year, countless bills that target their identities are introduced, it can be difficult to feel welcome. The Nashville Grizzlies played rugby with the exuberance of newly liberated people who were finally able to be their authentic selves. I was inspired by their brotherhood.
When I read about the Charlie Kirk Act being passed last week, I felt a visceral need to write about it.
While the bill is presented as legislation that strengthens free speech and encourages greater public discourse on campuses, it would effectively allow a school to expel a student who felt compelled to walk out on a speaker with hateful views, forcing marginalized groups to sit through existentially harmful rhetoric.
And ironically, it doesn’t seem like free speech goes both ways — a Tennessee University administrator lost their job last year for sharing negative views on Charlie Kirk, and countless LGBTQ books have been banned not only in schools, but even in adult libraries.
We like to think that as time moves forward, progress is inevitable, but this isn’t always the case. In a 2023 study, 27% of LGBTQ Tennesseans and 43% of transgender people in the state have considered relocating, forcing them to reckon with leaving home in pursuit of a better life. Nashville Grizzlies Captain Ethan Thatcher told me, “I’ve thought about leaving Tennessee. Hard not to when the government does not want you here. What has kept me here is the Grizzlies community, and the thought that existence is resistance.”
Everybody in our country deserves to feel safe. I thought that was a core value of the American ethos, but apparently, in some states, certain groups are welcome while others are ostracized.
Tennessee Gov. Bill Lee should reject the Charlie Kirk Act.
Tyler Kania is a 2025 IAN Book of the Year nominated author and civil rights activist from Columbia, Conn.
DC Center marks one year at new location
Calendar: April 24-30
Adoption under suspicion
Second trans member announces plans to resign from Capital Pride board
State Department implements anti-trans bathroom policy
Inside the lonely world of MAGA gay men
PHOTOS: Night of Champions
PHOTOS: National Champagne Brunch
‘Big Mistakes’ an uneven – but worthy – comedic showcase
