Erika Hilton, the first Black transgender woman elected to the Brazilian Congress, in April 2025 prepared to speak at the annual Brazil Conference at Harvard University and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in Cambridge, Mass.

As part of her official diplomatic duties, Hilton required a diplomatic visa to enter the U.S. However, the U.S. Embassy in Brasília issued the document with a glaring discrepancy: the congresswoman’s gender was listed as “male,” directly contradicting her official Brazilian identification, which legally recognizes her gender as “female.”

Hilton in response canceled her participation in the conference and filed a formal report with the United Nations, characterizing the incident as a violation of the Brazilian state’s diplomatic prerogatives and an act of institutional transphobia. The Brazilian Foreign Ministry last month issued a new diplomatic passport to the congresswoman in an act of symbolic reparation, a move intended to reaffirm her official status and legal identity in the wake of the U.S. embassy’s actions.

Despite the restorative gesture from the Brazilian government, Hilton told the Washington Blade that she has no intention of entering the U.S. in the near future — at least not while President Donald Trump remains in the White House. 

“I am afraid of what might happen to someone like me under an administration like Donald Trump’s,” Hilton said. “It is an authoritarian, anti-democratic government that has no respect for international law.”

“We’ve seen, for example, how ICE (U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement) acted with extreme violence against people who held tourist visas and were simply visiting the country,” she added. “There is a deep-seated fear of how people are treated by immigration authorities and law enforcement. All of this is terrifying, and it has convinced me that I should not set foot in the United States as long as a fascist government is in power.”

While her travel to the U.S. remains on hold, the congresswoman has been exceptionally active in Brazil. 

Hilton last month made history once again by becoming the first trans woman elected to chair the Chamber of Deputies’ Commission on the Defense of Women’s Rights. This appointment marks the first time a trans person has led a standing committee in the Brazilian Congress — the latest milestone in a career defined by its pioneering spirit.

“This is a milestone in my story. It’s a milestone for that dreamy young girl who, at 14, was forced into sex work on a street corner to survive, and who today returns to make peace with her past. But even from where I stand now, I am looking back and pointing toward those who are still out there on those street corners, to remind them: we are capable of so much more. We are capable of building something far greater than the limited spaces that hatred and discrimination have reserved for us,” she told the Blade.

Erika Hilton speaks at a rally for now President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva in São Paulo on Oct. 5, 2022. She was elected to the Brazilian Congress two days earlier. (Washington Blade video by Michael K. Lavers)

Unlike the Congressional Caucus for Women’s Issues in the U.S., which functions primarily as a platform for advocacy and lobbying, Brazil’s Commission on the Defense of Women’s Rights wields significant institutional power. Within the Brazilian legislative system, this body holds “conclusive authority,” a specialized power that allows it to bypass the general floor of the Chamber of Deputies. If the commission approves a bill, it can be sent directly to the Senate for a vote, bypassing a full house plenary session.

Beyond this autonomy, the commission possesses what is effectively a pocket veto: if it rejects a proposal on constitutional grounds or deems it detrimental to women’s protections, the bill is shelved immediately. This powerful committee has been the primary vehicle for landmark legislation, including the Equal Pay Act (Law 14,611/23) and critical laws targeting the political harassment of women.

Defining womanhood beyond biology

Hilton emphasizes that her election as chair of the Women’s Rights Commission was no easy feat, but a grueling struggle. The battle began within her own party, as she worked to convince colleagues that she was not only a viable candidate but an essential one.

The hostility intensified significantly following her nomination. 

Far-right conservative sectors orchestrated what the congresswoman denounced as a systematic, sponsored wave of attacks that transcended social media, spilling into the very halls of Congress. The rhetoric her opponents used leaned heavily on biological determinism — a strategy that attempts to reduce womanhood to reproductive functions or genetic characteristics.

Hilton’s election on March 11 laid bare a deeply fractured Congress. 

With 11 votes in her favor and 10 lawmakers casting blank ballots, the result served as an explicit form of protest. In the context of these internal elections, the blank votes did not signal indecision; rather, they represented a calculated attempt by the opposition to strip the incoming chair of her political legitimacy. It was a clear warning that Hilton will face fierce institutional resistance throughout her tenure — a reality that has already manifested during her first weeks at the helm of the commission.

Hilton in her inaugural address promised an inclusive leadership. 

“Here we will address the issues facing poor women, Black women, trans women, cis women, mothers, and breastfeeding women. All of them, without exception,” she said.

However, the most resonant moment of her speech was her historic tribute to Sojourner Truth, the Black abolitionist and human rights activist who, in 1851, delivered the iconic “Ain’t I a Woman?” speech at a women’s rights convention in the U.S. Paraphrasing Truth, Hilton argues that contemporary transphobia is deeply rooted in 19th century racism.

“Truth was a cisgender woman and a mother, but in that context, her biology did not grant her legitimacy or the right to challenge the status quo of womanhood because of her race. If we broaden our perspective, we must recall the eugenicist pseudo-science that deemed Black people inferior based on skull measurements, and the brutal gynecological experiments performed on enslaved women. Those women were not considered ‘women’ by the society of that era either,” Hilton told the Blade, explaining the historical framework behind her address.

“We, as trans women and travestis, are the targets of this historical moment,” she added. “I invoked Truth’s words to remind everyone that we are all victims of the same systemic oppression and the same denial of our right to our own identity — this did not start with us. Yesterday, she was targeted because of the color of her skin; today, I am targeted because of my body’s anatomy.”

Hilton concluded her inaugural address by reaffirming that her chairmanship will bring visibility to the identities that the commission has historically neglected. She emphasized that the trans struggle is a matter of survival in a country that leads the world in rates of violence against this community.

“We no longer accept being rendered invisible; we no longer accept having our identities violated. We refuse to live in a country that leads the world in killing us, by shooting us in the face, ripping out our hearts, and dragging us through the streets,” she declared.

Since Hilton became chair, committee sessions have been marked by an atmosphere of turmoil and legislative gridlock — a dire situation for a country that, over the past year, has set records for femicides. In Brazil, femicide is a specific legal classification for the murder of women motivated by gender, designed to ensure harsher criminal penalties. 

Opposition lawmakers, who rarely attended commission sessions before Hilton’s election, have begun showing up en masse to coordinate attacks against her, prioritizing obstructionism over the urgent need to address gender-based violence.

Tensions reached a fever pitch on April 8 when right-wing Congresswoman Rosana Valle threatened Hilton by invoking one of the country’s most significant legal provisions: the Maria da Penha Law. Recognized by the United Nations as one of the most progressive pieces of legislation in the world, the statute was designed specifically to protect women from domestic and family violence. 

In a move that Hilton described as “a mockery,” Valle stated that she would invoke the law against the committee chair herself if Hilton were ever to confront her, claiming that her colleague possessed “the strength of a man.”

“At the end of the day, their goal is to prevent me from delivering results. They work to stall the agenda so they can later claim, ‘Look, she didn’t do anything for women; she didn’t discuss anything relevant.’ It is not a lack of will on my part; it is a coordinated effort to block progress. But I am already developing strategies to overcome this roadblock. We are going to move forward and get the projects that really matter off the ground,” Hilton told the Blade.

The MAGA playbook in Brazil

Transphobia is nothing new in Brazil. 

For years, the country has consistently ranked as the deadliest in the world for trans people; in 2024, according to the National Association of Travestis and Transsexuals (ANTRA), 122 fatalities were recorded. However, the vitriol appearing on social media following Hilton’s election as chair of the women’s commission is strikingly familiar. The arguments and tactics being deployed in Brazil are mirror images of the far-right playbook currently being used in the U.S.

Brazilian lawmakers have deliberately adopted strategies from the “culture wars” that fuel the MAGA movement. This includes stoking moral panic over bathroom access, pathologizing gender identities, and attempting to bar transgender women from competitive sports.

For Hilton, Trump is the catalyst. 

“When a government with the reach and power of the United States uses state institutions to roll back rights, it creates a ripple effect that fuels violence worldwide. It feels as if our historic achievements are being systematically dismantled,” said Hilton.

“Since the day after the inauguration, the Trump administration has signed executive orders denying basic rights and issued official statements that dehumanize the transgender community, branding us as ‘enemies of society,’” she added. “The U.S. government legitimizes, incites, and encourages the hatred directed at a group that is already marginalized. In doing so, it fuels that hatred further, as it takes such rhetoric out of the shadows of anonymity and places it in the mouth of the president of a global superpower.”

Preserving hard-won rights

Brazilians in October will head to the polls for general elections, a high-stakes cycle that will decide the presidency and the makeup of the legislature. 

Hilton predicts an election season marked by escalating violence and targeted attacks against transgender people. She also notes the current global climate demands an even greater mobilization to defend the hard-won rights secured by the LGBTQ community.

“The situation is too volatile and turbulent for us to find even a glimmer of opportunity to establish new rights,” Hilton told the Blade. “For now, we must focus on safeguarding our existing protections so that, further down the road, we have the chance to secure new victories. History is cyclical. First comes a great wave of violence, repression, and attack. But following that, come the waves of victory.”

Hilton, meanwhile, will remain on the front lines of this battlefield, stepping into a spotlight that she knows brings less glory than it does pain and violence. But that does not seem to weigh on her. 

“In a sense, life’s cruelty has been kind to me,” Hilton reflects. “By forcing me to experience that cruelty when I was still a child, it was kind enough to teach me how to survive it. I am immune now, and therefore, I am prepared to face these obstacles.”

A gay Venezuelan asylum seeker who the U.S. “forcibly disappeared” to El Salvador has filed a claim against the federal government.

Immigrant Defenders Law Center, who represents Andry Hernández Romero, on Friday announced their client and five other Venezuelans who the Trump-Vance administration “forcibly removed” to El Salvador under the Alien Enemies Act of 1798, filed “administrative claims” under the Federal Tort Claims Act.

The White House on Feb. 20, 2025, designated Tren de Aragua, a Venezuelan gang, as an “international terrorist organization.”

President Donald Trump less than a month later invoked the Alien Enemies Act of 1798, which the Associated Press notes allows the U.S. to deport “noncitizens without any legal recourse.” The White House then “forcibly removed” Hernández, who had been pursuing his asylum case in the U.S., and more than 250 other Venezuelans to El Salvador.

Immigrant Defenders Law Center disputed claims that Hernández is a Tren de Aragua member.

Hernández was held at El Salvador’s Terrorism Confinement Center, a maximum-security prison known by the Spanish acronym CECOT, until his release on July 18, 2025. Hernández, who is back in Venezuela, claims he suffered physical and sexual abuse while at CECOT.

“As a Venezuelan citizen with no criminal record anywhere in the world, I would like to tell not only the government of the United States but governments everywhere that no human being is illegal,” said Hernández in the Immigrant Defenders Law Center press release. “The practice of judging whole communities for the wrongdoing of a single individual must end. Governments should use their power to help every person in the nation become more aware and informed, to strengthen our cultures and build a stronger generation with principles and values — one that multiplies the positive instead of destroying unfulfilled dreams and opportunities.” 

Immigrant Defenders Law Center filed claims on behalf of Hernández and the five other Venezuelans less than three months after American forces seized then-Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores, at their home in Caracas, the Venezuelan capital.

Maduro and Flores have pleaded not guilty to federal drug charges. Delcy Rodríguez, who was Maduro’s vice president, is Venezuela’s acting president.

‘Due process and accountability cannot be optional’

Immigrant Defenders Law Center on Friday also made the following demands: 

• The Trump administration must officially release the names of all people the United States sent to CECOT to ensure that everyone has been or will be released. 
• The federal government must clear the names of the 252 men wrongfully labeled as criminal gang members of Tren de Aragua.  
• DHS (Department of Homeland Security) must end the practice of outsourcing torture through third‑country removals, restore humanitarian parole, and rebuild a functioning, humane asylum system.  
• DHS must reinstate Temporary Protected Status for all individuals who cannot safely return to their home countries, halt mass deportations and unlawful raids and arrests, and guarantee due process for everyone navigating the immigration system.  
• Congress must pass the Neighbors Not Enemies Act, which would repeal the Alien Enemies Act.   

“In all my years as an immigration attorney, I have never seen a client simply vanish in the middle of their case with no explanation,” said Immigration Defenders Legal Fund Legal Services Director Melissa Shepard. “In court, the government couldn’t even explain where he was — he had been disappeared.” 

“When the government detains and transfers people in secrecy, without transparency or access to the courts, it tears at the basic protections a democracy is supposed to guarantee,” added Shepard. “What this experience makes painfully clear is that due process and accountability cannot be optional. They are the only safeguards standing between people and the kind of lawlessness our clients suffered. We must end third country transfers, restore the asylum system, and humanitarian parole, and reinstate temporary protective status so this nightmare never happens again.” 

Edición Cientonce es el socio mediático del Washington Blade en Ecuador. Esta nota salió en su sitio web el 12 de marzo.

Por VICTOR H. CARREÑO | En una sentencia del 5 de febrero de 2026, la Corte Constitucional declaró inconstitucional el requisito legal de mayoría de edad para modificar el campo de sexo o género en la cédula de identidad y fija lineamientos para que adolescentes trans puedan cambiar estos datos.

El máximo organismo de control e interpretación constitucional incorpora dos requerimientos: que la persona adolescente se presente al procedimiento administrativo con sus padres y que informes psicosociales acrediten un grado de madurez.

El fallo resuelve una consulta de constitucionalidad de una unidad judicial que lleva una acción de protección contra el Registro Civil presentada por la familia de un adolescente trans que solicitó, en junio de 2023, modificar el campo de género en la cédula.

La institución se negó porque la Ley Orgánica de Gestión de la Identidad y Datos Civiles establece que la rectificación de sexo o género es un procedimiento para personas mayores de 18 años.

El adolescente, cuya identidad se protege en la sentencia, cuenta con el apoyo de sus padres en su transición, que inició en 2020. En una audiencia, su madre expuso que si bien en el ámbito familiar y en el sistema educativo se respeta la identidad de su hijo, fuera de estos hay situaciones, como en consultas médicas en el Seguro Social, en que debe presentar la cédula de él y quienes la reciben preguntan si es el documento equivocado.

En el desarrollo de la sentencia, la Corte expone por qué el requisito de tener mayoría de edad para acceder a la modificación de datos en la cédula es inconstitucional.

Entre varios motivos, explica que restringe los derechos al libre desarrollo de la personalidad e identidad, que la edad no puede exigirse como “criterio determinante y único” para determinar la madurez de un adolescente, y que la medida puede generar impactos negativos en el bienestar psicológico y emocional.

Por ello, indica que existen mecanismos alternativos como la evaluación individualizada, el acompañamiento técnico y la consideración del contexto familiar.

En ese sentido, la Corte dispone al Registro Civil que debe proceder al cambio de los datos de adolescentes trans cuando acudan acompañades de sus representantes legales y con el respaldo de informes psicosociales.

Estos informes, agrega la sentencia, deben ser de profesionales acreditados o de órganos técnicos públicos competentes que sean considerados por el Registro Civil.

El fallo tiene efectos para este caso y otros similares. A diferencia de otras sentencias, la Corte no ordena una reforma a la legislación.

La organización Silueta X, que difundió el caso en un comunicado el 11 de marzo, calificó el fallo como histórico y explicó que este crea jurisprudencia de cumplimiento obligatorio.

🏳️‍⚧️🌈Un chico trans de 15 años le dijo al Estado ecuatoriano “yo sé quién soy”. Y la Corte Constitucional le dio la razón. 🏛️✊

Este fallo es nuestro. Es tuyo.

🔗 Lee la comunicado completa en nuestra bio.#DerechosTransEcuador #SiluetaX #CorteConstitucional #AdolescentesTrans pic.twitter.com/aXE4FU9VeS

— Asociación SILUETA 'X' (@SiluetaX) March 11, 2026

Sin embargo, otras organizaciones cuestionan los requisitos. Fundación Pakta indica que si bien la sentencia derriba la barrera etaria de la mayoría de edad, la inclusión de informes psicosociales contradice la tendencia global y regional hacia la despatologización.

Pakta menciona, por ejemplo, la Opinión Consultiva 24/17 de la Corte Interamericana de Derechos Humanos, instrumento que reconoce la identidad autopercebida de las personas y los derechos patrimoniales de parejas del mismo sexo.

El documento, recuerda Pakta en un comunicado, establece que para el reconocimiento de la identidad de género no se debe exigir certificados médicos ni psicológicos. Además, que la Organización Mundial de la Salud reconoció que la identidad trans no es una patología psiquiátrica.

Mientras que la activista Nua Fuentes, de Proyecto Transgénero, considera que los requisitos impuestos por la Corte pueden ser problemáticos. Menciona que frente al desconocimiento y prejuicios, profesionales de salud patologizan la identidad trans.

La Sentencia 4-24-CN/26 sobre la inconstitucionalidad de negar a adolescentes trans cambio de su sexo o género en la cédula es un acto que entreabre la puerta para los derechos, pero también sostiene algunas barreras y es problemático para adolescentes trans #Ecuador
Abro hilo🧵 pic.twitter.com/aKBUlmnU1A

— Nua Elizabeth Fuentes Aguirre (@NuaEliz) March 11, 2026

Además, señala que puede haber casos de que la familia y psicólogos expresen rechazo a la identidad trans y limiten los derechos de adolescentes trans. O también menciona casos de abandono de niñes y adolescentes trans y pregunta cómo reconocer su identidad si no cumplen con el requisito de acudir sin representantes legales.

Los condicionamientos para el cambio del campo de sexo o género en la cédula para adolescentes trans marcan también una diferencia con el procedimiento en personas trans de más de 18 años, pues estas —desde las reformas vigentes en 2024— no deben presentar requisitos. Solo su declaración expresa de ser una persona trans que desea que los datos de su cédula estén conformes a su identidad de género.

La madurez de niñeces y adolescencias ha sido un tema abordado en convenciones o instrumentos internacionales. La Convención sobre los Derechos del Niño de la ONU del 2009 es contundente al reconocerles como seres autónomos y capaces de formar sus propias opiniones a través de la experiencia, el entorno, las expectativas sociales y culturales.

Esta convención es mencionada en una sentencia de la Corte Constitucional en que reconoció la identidad de infancias y adolescencias trans en el sistema educativo.

En las Observaciones Generales del Comité de los Derechos del Niño, documentos de interpretación para los alcances de la mencionada Convención, se explica que la madurez es “la capacidad de comprender y evaluar las consecuencias de un asunto determinado”, lo cual debe considerarse en relación con su capacidad individual, contextos, entornos, experiencias de vida y familiar, desarrollo psicológico y no únicamente con su edad biológica.

Además, que la edad cronológica no determina la evolución de las capacidades de las niñeces y adolescencias porque estas crecen a lo largo del tiempo.