Since Donald Trump re-entered office on Jan. 20, he swiftly set the tone for his second term by signing a slew of executive orders addressing almost all sectors of the federal government and their policies. Among efforts to restructure the government with the stroke of a pen, Trump has set into motion his goal to eliminate protections and gender-affirming medical services for transgender Americans. This stems from his wider agenda to eliminate the promotion of “gender ideology” in the federal government. The order refers to the perspective that identifies “gender” as separate from “sex,” and navigates gender through a spectrum. Trump has vocally disapproved of such “woke” initiatives, and has explicitly targeted transgender and gender-nonconforming people to drive his agenda.
Trump stated in a campaign rally, “I will take historic action to defeat the toxic poison of gender ideology and reaffirm that God created two genders, male and female.” These statements reflect Trump’s focus to reassert a binary understanding of gender, rooted in a traditional– and arguably regressive– interpretation that resonates with his base. This stance signals an extreme contrast from the policies and progress made by previous administrations towards greater inclusivity and recognition of diverse gender identities. Moreover, Trump’s actions reflect a direct challenge to the progress made by LGBTQ+ advocates and transgender individuals to secure equitable healthcare, civil rights, and legal protections. This has created uncertainty amongst LGBTQ+ advocates and trans individuals who fear the rollback of their protections would encourage dangerous rhetoric about the legitimacy and value of transgender people, putting them at risk for violence and discrimination. Furthermore, medical professionals worry that the threats towards gender-affirming medical care will leave mental scars on transgender youth, who are more often diagnosed with mental health conditions. The shift away from inclusive healthcare practices could lead to higher rates of discrimination, mental health struggles, and even suicide among trans people.
While these actions generate nerve-wracking headlines, it’s important to understand that there are limits of presidential power, which affect how, and if, these executive orders will manifest.
What is an executive order and how does it work?
Essentially, executive orders are presidential instructions that direct the agencies of the executive branch and staff. Presidents often use executive orders to set the tone of their first 100 days in office, usually to initiate the fulfillment of campaign promises. To have full legal effect, an executive order must align with presidential powers as asserted in the Constitution or in a law by Congress. It’s important to note that the authority of executive orders is not final. A federal court must review the orders’ lawfulness and determine whether it’s a just exercise of presidential power. This is one of the many implementations of checks and balances, which guide the functions and limits of the power of each governmental branch. An executive order must abide by the Constitution, federal laws, and America’s fundamental rights. So, for Trump, he can sign as many executive orders as he pleases, but there are safeguards that prevent him from inhibiting American’s rights, violating the Constitution, or assuming the power of other branches.
Which executive orders have targeted transgender students?
Despite the talks of eliminating protections for trans Americans, Trump has signed a few executive orders that align with his campaign promises. On Jan. 20, Trump signed the executive order “Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government”– quite the title.
Let’s break it down. This order redefines gender labels so that they align with one’s biological features assigned at birth. So, the government will only recognize two sexes, male and female. It also calls for the removal of all federal documents, programs, and agencies promoting “gender ideology.” Furthermore, the order suggests a reinterpretation of the historic Bostock v. Clayton County (2020) ruling, which expanded the protections under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to include sexual orientation and gender identity. The Biden administration argued to apply this ruling to Title IX of the Educational Amendments Act of 1972, thus granting transgender and gender non-conforming students access to single-sex spaces, such as bathrooms and locker rooms, that align with their identity. However, the Trump administration argues that expanding the applications of Title IX to include trans individuals has harmed women and is legally unsustainable. The order calls for the removal of the Department of Education’s guidance documents, outlining applications of Title IX, how to address anti-LGBTQ+ harassment in schools, and affirming equity for transgender students. This comes from a broader effort to eliminate the promotion of a nonbinary gender perspective and protections for transgender Americans with federal funding.
On Feb. 5, Trump signed the order “Keeping Men out of Women’s Sports.” The non-issue of trans women in sports has been central to Trump’s second campaign agenda. Far right anti-LGBTQ+ groups argued that allowing trans women to compete and exist in private spaces alongside cisgender women is unfair and unsafe. This executive order centers Title IX, which prohibits sex discrimination in federally funded schools. The order states in its verbiage, based on the precedent set by cases such as Tennessee v. Cardona (2024), that ignoring “biological truths” between males and females deprives women and girls of meaningful access to educational facilities. To combat this, the federal government will withhold funding from educational programs that accept transgender women’s participation in women’s sports. The issue of privacy is also mentioned, which comes from the conservative base’s aim to mandate which bathrooms and locker rooms transgender people can access. The order also seeks to create set regulations for the participation of trans women in sports in major athletic organizations, including the International Olympics Committee, so that it aligns with this administration’s interpretation of Title IX. Alongside this order, a Republican-proposed bill calling for the same reinterpretation of Title IX, as well as the rescission of federal funding from non-compliant institutions, was introduced to the Senate. These actions have broader legal and social implications. The attempt to reinterpret Title IX to exclude trans people’s access to facilities, like bathrooms and locker rooms that align with their gender identity, could reverse progress made under the Biden Administration. Moreover, the executive orders threaten to withhold federal funding from educational programs that allow trans women to compete in women’s sports. This puts pressure on federally funded institutions, like schools and universities, to either comply with this administration’s agenda, or risk significant financial consequences. These orders could contribute to an increase in stigma and discrimination, as they undermine the legitimacy of trans people’s existence. This also feeds into an “Us versus Them” narrative, which further isolates transgender people and gender-nonconforming individuals as they are socially othered. The potential impact of these orders on transgender youth is arguably the most harmful. These orders make it harder for them to access supportive school environments and inclusive sports programs. This exacerbates feelings of isolation, depression, and anxiety.
Will this actually take effect?
The elimination of the Department of Education’s policies regarding transgender and gender-nonconforming youth was preceded by some Republican states, which have already adopted policies that align with this administration’s agenda. For example, the Parental Rights in Education (2022) bill, also known as “Don’t Say Gay,” has been adopted by several Republican states. This bill prohibits the instruction of sexual orientation and gender identity, and the usage of gender-affirming names and pronouns given they do not align with the student’s sex assigned at birth, from kindergarten through eighth grade. Moreover, the Movement Advancement Project tracks states that already have laws that ban or limit trans people’s access to single-sex spaces on various scales. According to the map, 16 states have varying severities of bans/limitations for trans people in single-sex spaces, while 13 states have laws that define “sex” in a way that impacts them.
The orders signed on Jan. 20 and Feb. 5 seek to expand these state laws to the federal level, which leave educators and trans students uncertain as they navigate their next steps. The orders have already had some real-world effects. The governing body for US college sports, the NCAA, has changed its policy regarding transgender athletes, banning trans women from competing on women’s teams. The policy limits competition in women’s sports to student-athletes assigned female at birth only. It further states it will permit student athletes assigned male at birth to practice with women’s teams and receive benefits such as medical care while practicing. Additionally, the usage of hormone therapies, often seen in gender-affirming medical care, will prevent athletes from competing.
Legal Backlash
Although this is a dangerous agenda that erodes decades of progress for LGBTQ+ advocates and transgender people in the United States, these actions are still subject to review. On March 3, 2025, the Senate rejected the bill that would prohibit federally funded institutions from allowing trans women to compete in women’s athletic programs. Senate Democrats have voiced that the policies restricting trans athletes’ participation in team sports increases discrimination, particularly for trans youth. They further argue that Republicans are seeking to undermine the rights of LGBTQ+ students through this bill. This block was not unexpected, as federal courts have often ruled in favor of trans athletes participating in student sports. For instance, on Aug. 17, 2023, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal upheld an injunction against an Idaho law that similarly barred trans athletes from competing. The court found that the law violated the rights of trans students under the Equal Protection Clause. A similar decision was made in a Connecticut district court, on the basis that trans athletes “did nothing wrong.” On May 10, 2024, a New York judge struck down a Long Island county’s order that denied park permits to women leagues that allow trans athletes to participate in a local roller derby league. The judge argued Nassau County Executive Bruce Blakeman did not have the authority to issue this executive order. In regards to Trump’s executive orders, multiple aspects are being legally challenged. On Feb. 4, 2025, a coalition issued a legal challenge against Trump’s order to eliminate gender-affirming medical care for those under 19. Due to checks and balances, and the legal battles ahead, it will likely be a while before the executive orders become legally binding. LGBTQ+ activists state that these laws are attempting to push trans individuals out of public life. Further, many argue the unconstitutionality of these discriminatory policies, citing violations of the 14th Amendment. The Trump administration is severely destabilizing the quality of life for trans people and increasing the risk of discrimination and violence against them. As federal judges and activists fight back through lawsuits and preliminary injunctions, we may never see the large-scale manifestations of these orders, or at least not for a long time. To contribute to the cause as students, we can contact our representatives to ensure they vote in our best interests. Organizations such as the American Civil Liberties Union can help you stay informed and offer ways to take action. Along with this, organizing and participating in discussions to raise awareness amongst peers and sharing information are equally as important as knowing it yourself. Although the fundamentals of our democracy and human rights have been destabilized, the power is still in the people’s hands.