Connect with us

Opinions

Trans women: Abuse in Colombia, rejection in U.S.

U.S. has a moral and legal obligation to provide refuge

Published

on

(Photo by mjbs/Bigstock)

I teach International Human Rights and U.S. Asylum law. I have traveled with students to Colombia and met with one of the most vulnerable marginalized communities – trans women. We learned about their constant threats, fear, and trauma. Social stigma, lack of government supported healthcare, employment exclusion and discrimination, and violent hate crimes, push many trans women to flee their homes, even their parents’ homes, in search of safety and dignity.  

Yes, some Colombian legal protections for LGBTQ communities exist, such as the decriminalization of same-sex relationships and recognition of gender identity. However, the state’s failure to effectively enforce these laws, forces many trans women to leave.       

And in our own backyard, Trump administration executive orders on (not) providing refuge, closing the border, and on (not recognizing) trans individuals will result in their continuing persecution.

They hope that by leaving Colombia, often risking their lives for the possibility of asylum, they will have a better future. The journey north is dangerous — natural, legal, and man-made challenges confront trans women as they try to cross through Central America by bus, foot, or truck. Central American countries like Panama, Costa Rica, and Nicaragua, pose legal, political, economic, and transphobic challenges. 

The passage through Central America is not just a political or bureaucratic challenge, but a physical one with extreme risks. Trans women often travel in disguise or attempt to blend in with other migrant groups, but their gender identity inevitably makes them vulnerable to sexual violence, exploitation, and even murder. Criminal organizations that prey on migrants see trans women as easy targets for extortion and trafficking. Alongside physical danger, they must navigate a maze of legal barriers. Central American governments’ reluctance to acknowledge gender-based persecution means many trans women do not receive the protection they would otherwise qualify for under international refugee laws.

Yet once they reach the U.S. border, they face a series of almost impossible legal and procedural hurdles. Many are detained in border facilities where the risk of abuse, including sexual assault and mistreatment by law enforcement, is significant, and they must secure competent legal representation. Immigration law in general, and asylum law specifically, is unbelievably complex. The Application for Asylum is 12 pages long, in English. There is no right to government-supported free legal aid, unlike the availability of public defenders for people charged with crimes. Trans women often struggle to find lawyers who are knowledgeable about the asylum procedures and how to prove persecution because of gender identity. Those who do manage to secure legal aid face an overcrowded, understaffed immigration system that can take years to process asylum applications, during which time they remain in a state of limbo.

This process involves telling their story before an asylum officer or an immigration judge, perhaps the most emotionally taxing part of the process. For many trans women, recounting their experiences of violence and discrimination in their home countries is not just a legal procedure, but an emotionally traumatic reenactment. Asylum officers and immigration judges may lack training in trans issues, sometimes fail to recognize the nuances of gender identity and violence, resulting in re-traumatization and the denial of claims that deserve protection under both U.S. and international human rights laws. If denied asylum, they need to file a written appeal within 10 days to an administrative appeals unit. And if they lose there, they can file an appeal to the U.S Court of Appeals where they reside.  

Between 2014 and 2024, data shows that the overwhelming majority of appeals from trans asylum applicants were filed by Latinx individuals. Of the 25 applicants, 20 were from Latin America, with Mexico, Honduras, and other Central American countries representing the bulk of petitioners. Most circuit courts denied the appeals, but the Ninth (covering California) and Tenth Circuit (covering Colorado and New Mexico) were most favorable to petitioners. Notably, there was no representation of Colombian nationals in this data. This absence, however, does not mean that trans women from Colombia were not seeking asylum. Instead, it could reflect numerous barriers, such as being denied by an immigration judge without appealing process, fear of repercussions, language barriers, lacking resources to afford legal counsel, or insufficient knowledge of the appeals.

The stakes could not be higher. For trans women from Colombia and other countries, asylum in the United States is not just about securing a new life, but escaping a nightmare of systemic violence and oppression. 

As a society, we must do more than merely acknowledge these challenges; we must address them directly. Colombia must recognize the rights of all of its people, including trans women, and equally important, implement those laws by charging, investigating and sentencing the perpetrators of human rights abuses against trans women. The U.S. can withhold foreign aid for failure to comply with the Leahy Principles, which prevents the U.S. from providing foreign aid to governments with poor human rights records. 

We have a moral and legal obligation to provide refuge given that we passed the U.S. Refugee Act as far back as 1980. This means ensuring that their voices are heard, their experiences are validated, and that the asylum process is accessible and protects their rights. Without these changes, the cycle of violence and displacement will continue, leaving countless trans women in danger and without hope for the future.


Fernando Chang-Muy is the Thomas O’Boyle Lecturer in Law at the University of Pennsylvania. Ashley Acosta is a junior at the University of Pennsylvania majoring in Political Science with minors in Legal Studies & History, Sociology, and Latin American and Latinx Studies.

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

Letter-to-the-Editor

Candidates should pledge to nominate LGBTQ judge to Supreme Court

Presidential, Senate hopefuls need to go on the record

Published

on

U.S. Supreme Court (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

As soon as the final votes are cast and counted and verified after the November 2026 elections are over, the 2028 presidential cycle will begin in earnest. Polls, financial aid requests, and volunteer opportunities ad infinitum will flood the public and personal media. There will be more issues than candidates in both parties. The rending of garments and mudslinging will be both interesting and maybe even amusing as citizens will watch how candidates react to each and every issue of the day.

There is one particular item that I am hoping each candidate will be asked whether in private or in public. If a Supreme Court vacancy occurs in your potential administration, will you nominate an open and qualified LGBTQ to join the remaining eight?

Other interest groups on both sides have made similar demands over the years and have had them honored. Is it not time that our voices are raised as well? There are several already sitting judges on both state and federal benches that have either been elected statewide or approved by the U.S. Senate.

Our communities are being utilized and abused on judicial menus. Enough already! Challenge each and every candidate, regardless of their party with our honest question and see if honest answers are given. By the way … no harm in asking the one-third of the U.S. Senate candidates too who will be on ballots. Looking forward to any candidate tap dancing!

Continue Reading

Opinions

2026 elections will bring major changes to D.C. government

Mayor’s office, multiple Council seats up for grabs

Published

on

(Washington Blade file image by Aram Vartian)

Next year will be a banner year for elections in D.C. The mayor announced she will not run. Two Council members, Anita Bonds, At-large, and Brianne Nadeau, Ward 1, have announced they will not run. Waiting for Del. Norton to do the same, but even if she doesn’t, there will be a real race for that office. 

So far, Robert White, Council member at-large, and Brooke Pinto, Council member Ward 2, are among a host of others, who have announced. If one of these Council members should win, there would be a special election for their seat. If Kenyon McDuffie, Council member at-large, announces for mayor as a Democrat, which he is expected to do, he will have to resign his seat on the Council as he fills one of the non-Democratic seats there. Janeese George, Ward 4 Council member, announced she is running for mayor. Should she win, there would be a special election for her seat. Another special election could happen if Trayon White, Ward 8, is convicted of his alleged crimes, when he is brought to trial in January. Both the Council chair, and attorney general, have announced they are seeking reelection, along with a host of other offices that will be on the ballot.  

Many of the races could look like the one in Ward 1 where at least six people have already announced. They include three members of the LGBTQ community. It seems the current leader in that race is Jackie Reyes Yanes, a Latina activist, not a member of the LGBTQ community, who worked for Mayor Fenty as head of the Latino Affairs Office, and for Mayor Bowser as head of the Office of Community Affairs. About eight, including the two Council members, have already announced they are running for the delegate seat.

I am often asked by candidates for an endorsement. The reason being my years as a community, LGBTQ, and Democratic, activist; and my ability to endorse in my column in the Washington Blade. The only candidate I endorsed so far is Phil Mendelson, for Council chair. While he and I don’t always agree on everything, he’s a staunch supporter of the LGBTQ community, a rational person, and we need someone with a steady hand if there really are six new Council members, out of the 13. 

When candidates call, they realize I am a policy wonk. My unsolicited advice to all candidates is: Do more than talk in generalities, be specific and honest as to what you think you can do, if elected. Candidates running for a legislative office, should talk about what bills they will support, and then what new ones they will introduce. What are the first three things you will focus on for your constituents, if elected. If you are running against an incumbent, what do you think you can do differently than the person you hope to replace? For any new policies and programs you propose, if there is a cost, let constituents know how you intend to pay for them. Take the time to learn the city budget, and how money is currently being spent. The more information you have at your fingertips, the smarter you sound, and voters respect that, at least many do. If you are running for mayor, you need to develop a full platform, covering all the issues the city will face, something I have helped a number of previous mayors do. The next mayor will continue to have to deal with the felon in the White House. He/she/they will have to ensure he doesn’t try to eliminate home rule. The next mayor will have to understand how to walk a similar tightrope Mayor Bowser has balanced so effectively. 

Currently, the District provides lots of public money to candidates. If you decide to take it, know the details. The city makes it too easy to get. But while it is available, take advantage of it. One new variable in this election is the implementation of rank-choice voting. It will impact how you campaign. If you attack another candidate, you may not be the second, or even third, choice, of their strongest supporters. 

Each candidate needs a website. Aside from asking for donations and volunteers, it should have a robust issues section, biography, endorsements, and news. One example I share with candidates is my friend Zach Wahls’s website. He is running for United States Senate from Iowa. It is a comprehensive site, easy to navigate, with concise language, and great pictures. One thing to remember is that D.C. is overwhelmingly Democratic. Chances are the winner of the Democratic primary will win the general election. 

Potential candidates should read the DCBOE calendar. Petitions will be available at the Board of Elections on Jan. 23, with the primary on June 16th, and general election on Nov. 3. So, ready, set, go! 


Peter Rosenstein is a longtime LGBTQ rights and Democratic Party activist.

Continue Reading

Opinions

Lighting candles in a time of exhaustion

Gunmen killed 15 people at Sydney Hanukkah celebration

Published

on

(YouTube screenshot via Reuters)

In the wake of the shooting at Bondi Beach that targeted Jews, many of us are sitting with a familiar feeling: exhaustion. Not shock or surprise, but the deep weariness that comes from knowing this violence continues. It is yet another reminder that antisemitism remains persistent.

Bondi Beach is far from Washington, D.C., but antisemitism does not respect geography. When Jews are attacked anywhere, Jews everywhere feel it. We check on family and friends, absorb the headlines, and brace ourselves for the quiet, numbing normalization that has followed acts of mass violence.

Many of us live at an intersection where threats can come from multiple directions. As a community, we have embraced the concept of intersectional identity, and yet in queer spaces, many LGBTQ+ Jews are being implicitly or explicitly asked to play down our Jewishness. Jews hesitate before wearing a Magen David or a kippah. Some of us have learned to compartmentalize our identities, deciding which part of ourselves feels safest to lead with. Are we welcome as queer people only if we mute our Jewishness? Are those around us able to acknowledge that our fear is not abstract, but rooted in a lived reality, one in which our friends and family are directly affected by the rise in antisemitic violence, globally and here at home?

As a result of these experiences, many LGBTQ+ Jews feel a growing fatigue. We are told, implicitly or explicitly, that our fear is inconvenient; that Jewish trauma must be contextualized, minimized, or deferred in favor of other injustices. Certainly, the world is full of horror. And yet, we long for a world in which all lives are cherished and safe, where solidarity is not conditional on political purity or on which parts of ourselves are deemed acceptable to love.

We are now in the season of Chanuka. The story of this holiday is not one of darkness vanishing overnight. It is the story of a fragile light that should not have lasted. Chanuka teaches us that hope does not require certainty; it requires persistence and the courage to kindle a flame even when the darkness feels overwhelming.

For LGBTQ+ Jews, this lesson resonates deeply. We have survived by refusing to disappear across multiple dimensions of our identities. We have built communities, created rituals, and embraced chosen families that affirm the fullness of who we are.

To our LGBTQ+ siblings who are not Jewish: this is a moment to listen, to stand with us, and to make space for our grief. Solidarity means showing up not only when it is easy or popular, but especially when it is uncomfortable.

To our fellow Jews: your exhaustion is valid. Your fear is understandable, and so is your hope. Every candle lit this Chanuka is an act of resilience. Every refusal to hide, every moment of joy, is a declaration that hatred will not have the final word.

Light does not deny darkness. It confronts it.

As we light our candles this Chanuka season, may we protect one another and bring light to one another, even as the world too often responds to difference with violence and hate.

Joshua Maxey is the executive director of Bet Mishpachah, D.C.’s LGBTQ synagogue.

Continue Reading

Popular