Opinions
Florida’s ‘Don’t Say Gay’ laws undermine protections for LGBTQ teachers, students
Measures must be stricken down, enjoined, or otherwise invalidated
Formally entitled the “Parental Rights in Education Act,” Florida House Bill 1557 amends Florida Statute § 1001.42 to add a new subsection 8(c)(3), which provides: “Classroom instruction by school personnel or third parties on sexual orientation or gender identity may not occur in kindergarten through grade 3 or in a manner that is not age-appropriate or developmentally appropriate for students in accordance with state standards.” In May of this year, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis signed House Bill 1069, which has been viewed as expanding H.B. 1557 by requiring that sex education classes in Florida teach that “sex is determined by biology and reproductive function at birth,” and that reproductive gender roles are “binary, stable, and unchangeable.” Among other things, the new bill also broadens the ban on classroom discussions of gender identity and sexual orientation so that it covers pre-kindergarten through eighth grade and prevents employees from using pronouns other than those that correspond with sex assigned at birth. Critics of these laws have labeled H.B. 1557 and H.B. 1069 “Don’t Say Gay” laws. We share these critics’ concerns.
Below, we highlight the potential of these laws to undermine anti-discrimination protections for teachers and students at public educational institutions in Florida and summarize litigation challenging these laws.
I. The Legal Landscape for LGBTQ Anti-Discrimination Protections in Florida
On June 15, 2020, the Supreme Court issued a landmark decision in Bostock v. Clayton County, Georgia, 140 S. Ct. 1731 (2020). In a 6-3 decision, the Court interpreted existing federal law to protect LGBTQ individuals from discrimination in employment and public accommodations by recognizing sexual orientation and gender identity as protected categories under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. As a result of Bostock, LGBT individuals who work for an employer with fifteen (15) or more employees, and who have experienced discrimination based on their sexual orientation or gender identity, now have the right to take legal action against their employer by filing a charge with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and/or taking their employer to court.
In light of the Supreme Court’s decision, the Florida Human Rights Commission issued a notice that clarified that the agency would now broaden its mandate to include combatting discrimination based on gender identity and sexual orientation. Thus, after Bostock, LGBTQ Floridians, including teachers, gained vital anti-discrimination protections at work and in housing under both federal and state law.
Bostock v. Clayton County has been interpreted to protect LGBTQ students from discrimination as well. For instance, in Grimm v. Gloucester County School Board, 972 F.3d 586 (4th Cir. 2020),the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit relied on Bostock to hold that disparate treatment on the basis of a student’s sexual orientation and transgender status—in this case, barring transgender students from using school restrooms that align with their gender identity—is considered discrimination under Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972. Id. at 618–19. These protections are especially important for LGBTQ students in conservative states like Florida; these students may face discrimination on a direct level as well as indirectly from institutions and political players who aim to promote homophobic and transphobic rhetoric and policies.
Unfortunately, the victory represented by Bostock has been overshadowed by H.B. 1557 and H.B. 1069.
II. Harm and Confusion Created by H.B. 1557 and H.B. 1069
While it is too soon to know how H.B. 1557 and H.B. 1069 will impact the application of Bostock, there is cause for alarm. Under Florida law, if a parent raises a concern about compliance with H.B. 1557 and that concern is not “resolved by the school district,” the parent may proceed before a special magistrate or “[b]ring an action against the school district to obtain a declaratory judgment that the school district procedure or practice violates [H.B. 1557] and seek injunctive relief.” Fla. Stat. § 1001.42(8)(c)(7)(b). If the parent prevails in the suit, the court may offer the parent damages and “shall award reasonable attorney fees and court costs.” Id.
Undoubtedly, Florida’s LGBTQ teachers will face greater scrutiny and potential legal obstacles as a result of these laws. As critics have pointed out, these laws’ ambiguity and undefined terms represent a potential minefield for LGBTQ teachers. For instance, Florida law now bans instructing some students on sexual orientation. Would a gay teacher who mentions in class that he has a husband violate this law? Would a cisgender teacher with a nonbinary child be in violation if she referenced her child by their proper pronouns in front of her students?
For transgender and nonbinary teachers, the environment is even more dangerous. H.B. 1069, which went into effect on July 1, 2023, states: “An employee or contractor of a public K–12 educational institution may not provide to a student his or her preferred personal title or pronouns if such preferred personal title or pronouns do not correspond to his or her sex,” with “sex” defined in strictly “biological” terms. Fla. Stat. § 1000.071(1), (3). It is unclear whether this language (i) forbids a transgender or gender-nonconforming teacher from providing the teacher’s own preferred pronouns to students, or (ii) forbids a teacher from providing a transgender or gender-nonconforming student’s preferred pronouns to that student—or both. Ambiguities aside, this provision is likely to force transgender and nonbinary teachers in Florida back into the closet or ban them from teaching in Florida schools altogether. If transgender and nonbinary teachers are prohibited from truthfully representing their identities in front of their students, transgender and nonbinary identities are essentially banished from the classroom entirely.
Already, headlines have been made by teachers who have fallen on the wrong side of these new laws. For instance, the Hernando County School Board placed a fifth-grade teacher in Brooksville, Fla. under investigation for showing her class a Disney film that depicted a gay character. In another instance, an assistant principal in Polk County was told that she couldn’t pass out LGBTQ-inclusive “safe space” stickers because it violated the new legislation. Some teachers have publicly decried that the laws make their jobs nearly impossible and others have decided to quit teaching altogether.
While these laws are new and their impact on Florida’s LGBTQ teachers and other staff is only just beginning to be understood, the socio-political movement that paved the way for this legislation has been decades in the making. In 1977, singer and political activist Anita Bryant led an anti-LGBTQ campaign in Dade County, Florida, targeting housing and employment protections for gay individuals. Bryant was particularly concerned that the ordinance would prevent gay teachers from being fired for their sexual orientation and she argued that gay teachers posed a threat to Florida’s children. Unfortunately, the campaign was a short-term success for anti-LGBTQ activists, culminating with the repeal of a nondiscrimination ordinance. Historians note that this tactic of using the protection of children to restrict LGBTQ rights was seen even before Bryant’s crusade, with the infamous Johns Committee in 1958 targeting and eliminating LGBTQ individuals from Florida schools.
Although Bryant initially won the repeal of the ordinance, her activism spurred LGBTQ mobilization that ultimately successfully countered her bigoted efforts.
III. Lawsuits to Enjoin Enforcement
We are aware of two recently filed cases seeking to enjoin enforcement of H.B. 1557.
First is M.A. v. Florida State Board of Education, No. 4:22CV00134 (N.D. Fla.), a case that was initiated in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Florida on March 31, 2022. In M.A., a group of students, parents, and teachers advanced claims arising from alleged violations of the Constitution’s Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses, the First Amendment, and Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972. On February 15, 2023, District Judge Allen Winsor, a Trump appointee, concluded that the plaintiffs had “not alleged sufficient facts to show standing” and dismissed the case. M.A. v. Fla. State Bd. of Educ., No. 4:22-cv-134-AW-MJF, 2023 WL 2631071, at *1 (N.D. Fla. Feb. 15, 2023). In so holding, the court reasoned that the plaintiffs failed to “allege facts showing any concrete future harm that is fairly traceable to [H.B. 1557’s] enforcement and redressable by an injunction prohibiting that enforcement.” Id. at *2. On March 20, 2023, the plaintiffs appealed the case to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit. See M.A. v. Fla. State Bd. of Educ., No. 23-10866, Dkt. 1 (11th Cir. Mar. 20, 2023). In their appellate briefing, the plaintiffs argue that the district court erred because the plaintiffs alleged sufficient facts to confer standing in the form of “three distinct injuries caused by H.B. 1557”: (i) a chilling effect on speech, (ii) denial of access to ideas and information in school, and (iii) stigma and unequal treatment in schools based on LGBT status. See M.A. v. Fla. State Bd. of Educ., No. 23-10866, Dkt. 38, at 38 (11th Cir. May 31, 2023). As of this writing, the appeal remains pending before the Eleventh Circuit.
Second is Cousins v. School Board of Orange County, Florida, No. 6:22-CV-01312 (M.D. Fla.), which was initiated in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida on July 25, 2022. The plaintiffs in Cousins were a group of students and parents, as well as a mission-driven non-profit called CenterLink, Inc, who advanced claims arising from alleged violations of the First Amendment and the Constitution’s Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses. On August 16, 2023, District Judge Wendy Berger, also a Trump appointee, dismissed the case for reasons similar to the reasons provided by Judge Winsor in the M.A. litigation. See Cousins v. Sch. Bd. of Orange Cnty., Fla., No. 6:22-cv-1312-WWB-LHP, Dkt. 143 (M.D. Fla. Aug. 16, 2023). As of this writing, the plaintiffs have not appealed the decision.
It remains unclear whether and to what extent these two cases will succeed in enjoining enforcement of H.B. 1557 and H.B. 1069. Settlement discussions are currently ongoing in the M.A. case, and we are cautiously optimistic that the plaintiffs in that case will be able to obtain some form of relief.
Whether through litigation, legislative repeal or some other means, Florida’s recently enacted anti-LGBT laws are harmful and should be stricken down, enjoined, or otherwise invalidated.
For years, the far right has relied on a familiar infrastructure to wage its political battles: coordinated legal networks, back-channeled money, and an ever-growing pipeline of model legislation that moves quietly from one statehouse to another. What used to be a fringe ecosystem of activist lawyers has matured into something far more muscular. Today, the attacks on LGBTQ Americans—especially transgender people—are not random. They are designed, drafted, and deployed by a disciplined constellation of groups that understand how to move legislation with precision. And if Democrats, civil rights advocates, and national LGBTQ organizations continue treating each bill as an isolated outrage rather than a unified offensive, this machine will keep outpacing them.
Most Americans have never heard of outfits like the Alliance Defending Freedom, the American Principles Project, the Leadership Institute’s law arm, or the network of state-based policy shops that orbit the Heritage Foundation. But these entities now function as the shadow authors of state legislation. The anti-trans sports bans that appeared in more than 20 states did not arise organically; they were cloned from drafts circulated by ADF attorneys. The same is true for bills restricting gender-affirming care, limiting name and pronoun accommodations in schools, or expanding “religious liberty” carve-outs that allow discrimination against LGBTQ employees or customers. Legislators often change a few words, swap in a local sponsor, and reintroduce the same provisions session after session — giving the impression of momentum when, in reality, only a handful of ideologues are writing the nation’s culture-war script.
The operational model is simple: produce a bill, partner with a state-level think tank, recruit a legislator to introduce it, and provide legal testimony to defend it. But the strategic sophistication lies upstream. These groups have spent years cultivating relationships with attorneys general, state solicitors, and conservative judges who are sympathetic to their worldview. They draft legislation with litigation in mind, anticipating which language will survive scrutiny before the federal courts they have worked diligently to remake. They treat policy, politics, and jurisprudence as a seamless ecosystem; meanwhile, LGBTQ advocates are forced to fight on three fronts at once, often with smaller budgets and no comparable network of state-by-state affiliates.
What is most striking now is the acceleration. Bills that used to be test-driven in one or two states are being introduced in a dozen simultaneously. After the Supreme Court’s Dobbs decision, the same legal strategists pushing abortion bans pivoted almost immediately toward restricting trans health care, framing puberty blockers and hormone therapy as “sterilization.” The rhetorical shift was not accidental. It was a deliberate legal construction designed to open the door to future Fourteenth Amendment challenges, should the movement secure a case capable of reaching the Supreme Court. This is not simply a legislative fight; it is the groundwork for long-term judicial warfare.
And yet, Democrats and even national LGBTQ groups often treat these measures as if they were spontaneous outbursts of local prejudice. That is politically naïve. The reason similar bills appear in Idaho, Florida, Tennessee, Kansas, and Ohio at the same time is because they originate from the same set of PDFs stored on the same servers belonging to the same legal networks. The far right has embraced an industrial model of anti-LGBTQ policymaking: mass production, rapid deployment, and coordinated amplification by media channels that echo the same talking points across state lines.
The consequence is that the burden falls on queer people themselves—especially trans people—to respond to an avalanche of bills, hearings, lawsuits, and administrative changes that no individual or small advocacy team can fully track. When you have a network of attorneys feeding language to legislators, drafting amicus briefs, and preparing future litigation strategies in advance, you create an asymmetry that is difficult to counter with reactive press releases or one-off legal challenges. This imbalance of power is not about public opinion, which still supports LGBTQ equality by wide margins. It is about institutional positioning. The far right has placed its lawyers where the pressure points are: in state AG offices, in coordinated legislative caucuses, in judicial clerkships, and in the nonprofit legal trenches where issue fights are shaped long before the public hears about them.
There is a path forward, but it requires abandoning the old model of treating each bill as a separate emergency. LGBTQ organizations need a unified, long-range strategy that mirrors the discipline of the groups attacking them. That means state-by-state legal surveillance, rapid drafting of counter-model legislation, formal partnerships with progressive state AGs, and a standing litigation coalition capable of anticipating—not just responding to—legal threats. It also means investing in local leaders who understand that these bills are symptoms of a national machine, not quirks of their hometown politics.
What’s at stake here is nothing less than the architecture of civil rights in the United States. The far right is attempting to rewrite the legal landscape through volume and repetition, hoping courts will eventually treat these contrived bills as reflections of a shifting national consensus. They are betting that if they introduce enough legislation, in enough states, for enough years, the judiciary will reinterpret LGBTQ equality not as a settled constitutional principle but as a contested social question that can be narrowed or rolled back. Their ultimate goal is not just to restrict trans rights today but to lay the doctrinal groundwork for limiting LGBTQ protections for a generation.
The community can still win this fight, but only if it sees the battlefield clearly. These bills are not local skirmishes—they are coordinated acts of legal engineering. And it is time the pro-equality movement built an equally coordinated system to match them.
Isaac Amend is a writer based in the D.C. area. He is a transgender man and was featured in National Geographic’s ‘Gender Revolution’ documentary. He serves on the board of the LGBT Democrats of Virginia. Contact him on Instagram at @isaacamend
Opinions
Everything is Everything
Transformer’s 21st Annual Benefit Art Auction & Gala at the LINE DC November 19, 2025
In Washington, DC, art has never existed in isolation—it thrives where people gather and create. Art isn’t an accessory to the city’s identity—it’s foundational to it. This city was designed by artists, built by craftsmen, and has been continuously shaped by creative vision for more than two centuries. While other American cities grew organically around commerce or geography, Washington was imagined first, drawn by hand, and constructed as a deliberate artistic expression of democratic ideals. The result is a living gallery where public art doesn’t just reflect our history; it actively shapes how we understand citizenship, memory, and identity.
For 23 years, Transformer has been a cornerstone of DC’s contemporary art scene, committed to uplifting emerging and underrepresented artists who challenge boundaries and engage audiences with new experimental artistic concepts. On November 22, 2025, Transformer will host Everything is Everything, our 21st Annual Benefit Art Auction & Gala at the LINE DC, a night dedicated to celebrating the power of connection through art, performance, and community.
Everything is Everything is an extension of our non-profit organization’s cutting-edge vision, bringing together artists across different mediums, aesthetics, and walks of life. This philosophy embraces interconnectedness: where art, identity, and community are a part of the same living fabric. The gala brings together hundreds of people to celebrate art & artists, featuring over 140+ artworks in a public exhibition available for silent bidding. Guests also enjoy our innovative Artist Activated Experiences Lounge, featuring immersive installations by DC based queer artists Bumper, Katie Magician, Div0id, JaxKnife Complex, Stitches DC, Hennessey and Kunj.
In a time when queer and drag performers face renewed cultural and legislative attacks, Everything is Everything affirms that freedom of expression is not optional—it’s essential. Our “Celebration of DC Club Kids” pays tribute to DC’s legendary Club Kids and nightlife culture—those radiant spaces that have long nurtured queer creativity, self-expression, and freedom. Produced at the Gala in collaboration with queer artist collective haus of bambi, this performance honors our city’s history while celebrating the diversity and creativity that will continue to shape its future. Everything is Everything culminates in a show-stopping performance by iconic New York City based performance artist, cabaret singer, and drag artist Joey Arias.
As Transformer’s Everything is Everything Gala Committee, we’ve experienced firsthand how artists in DC transform spaces, challenge norms, and build community. The Gala is a celebration of that creativity and resilience. It is also a crucial act of support: proceeds from the Everything is Everything Benefit Art Auction & Gala directly supports artists while sustaining Transformer’s year-round exhibitions and programs that elevate emerging artists and arts leaders within DC and beyond. In doing so, Everything is Everything ensures that experimental and inclusive artistic practice, particularly of queer, trans, and BIPOC artists, continues to thrive.
Because in DC, art isn’t just something we look at—it’s something we live, share, and fight to protect.
Purchase tickets to Everything is Everything, Transformer’s Annual Benefit Art Auction & Gala at onecau.se/everythingiseverything. Learn more about Transformer’s mission at www.transformerdc.org.
- Transformer’s Everything is Everything Gala Committee: Allana D’Amico, Sondra Fein, Theresa Nielson, Jennifer Sakai, Christopher Addison, Monica Alford, Samantha Dean, Samira Farmer, Carole Feld, Celina Gerbic, Ally Helmers, Allison Marvin, Marissa McBride, Tom Noll, Crystal Patterson, Victoria Reis, Dorothy Stein, Emily Strulson, Gregg Tourville, José Alberto Uclés, and Hanna Thompson
Opinions
MTG should keep up the pressure on Trump, MAGA
Unexpected flip a welcome sign of GOP resistance
If the first time you ever saw, or heard, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.), was when she appeared on “The View,” you could be forgiven if you thought what an intelligent, rational, woman she is. If it wasn’t the first time you saw her, you just wondered what happened to the wacko you thought you knew.
Marjorie Taylor Greene has stood up for the women who were the victims of Jeffrey Epstein and his friends. She was one of the 218 who signed on to bring the bill to release the files to a vote in the House. I think the vote will be more lopsided than people think, getting many more Republicans. After it passes the House, it will go to the Senate, and if it passes there, to the felon, for him to decide — will he sign it or veto it?
Greene has also spoken out and criticized the Republican Party for not agreeing to extend the tax credits for the ACA, to ensure the cost of insurance premiums remain at least affordable for most. Again, we all had to wonder what happened to the real MTG, the non-repentant Trumper. This version of Greene has driven the president to an apoplectic state. He has given her a new nickname, and accused her of betraying the entire Republican Party. These are quotes from Trump on social media last Saturday: He called her the “Lightweight Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Brown (Green grass turns brown when it begins to ROT!),” based on what she said. He accused her of turning left, and according to him “performed poorly on the pathetic View, and became the RINO that we all know she always was. Just another fake politician, no different than Rand Paul Jr. (Thomas Massie), who got caught being a full-fledged Republican In Name Only (RINO)! MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!!!.”
Although I support what Greene is saying on these two issues we shouldn’t forget Greene is the woman who said, “joining the military is “ like throwing your life away” while discussing the U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan on Fox News. She also said regarding two July 4th incidents in which seven people were fatally shot at an Independence Day parade in Highland Park, Illinois, and two police officers were gunned down in Philadelphia, “Two shootings on July 4: One in a rich white neighborhood and the other at a fireworks display. It almost sounds like it’s designed to persuade Republicans to go along with more gun control.” Then when talking about the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol, in which hundreds of Trump supporters stormed the building to stop certification of the presidential election results, she called it “a little riot.” Very bizarre. We are all definitely living in Trump’s alternate universe.
I think the thing that bothers the felon the most is Greene’s insistence the Epstein files be released. It is interesting there is nothing yet public that implicates Trump in actively participating in any pedophilia with Epstein. Some of the released emails do implicate him in knowing what Epstein was doing, but not speaking out about it. But what is making the felon in the White House apparently hysterical, and fighting so hard, to keep the Epstein files from the public? What does he know is in them, that we don’t? He has tried every distraction to move this off the front-page including bombing Venezuelan ships he claims are carrying drugs, without any proof, and threatening a land war against Venezuela. Since that hasn’t worked, he is having his AG, his lapdog, Pam Bondi, have a prosecutor look at only what Democrats could be involved in the Epstein scandal, clearly hoping if there is an active investigation it could keep the files away from the public, possibly for years.
Because of the recent election results, the felon is backtracking on the tariffs he said were so important, and a huge positive, for the United States. Those results clearly showed the people are blaming him, and the Republican Party, for the rising prices. Even to a clueless, evil, human being like him, it has become clear the tariffs are making life worse for the American people.
So, I say to Marjorie Taylor Greene: Stay this new course you are on. Keep up the work attacking the felon, and Republicans who are going along with him. Know that even those of us who think you are a wacko, thank you.
Peter Rosenstein is a longtime LGBTQ rights and Democratic Party activist.
-
District of Columbia3 days agoNew LGBTQ bar Rush set to debut
-
Virginia5 days agoRepealing marriage amendment among Va. House Democrats’ 2026 legislative priorities
-
Opinions3 days agoMTG should keep up the pressure on Trump, MAGA
-
Eswatini4 days agoPEPFAR delivers first doses of groundbreaking HIV prevention drug to two African countries
