Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

​A pride flag, a bathroom ban, a job change: LGBTQ+ federal workers challenge Trump in court

Multiple current and former federal employees have sued, saying the Trump administration’s executive orders on gender and DEI have made it impossible for them to do their jobs.

News

The back of a person's head, they are holding a small rainbow colored flag.

Over the past year, the administration has faced a number of high-profile lawsuits over the ban on LGBTQ+ pride expression and refusal to let transgender workers use bathrooms that align with their genders.

Calla Kessler/The Washington Post/Getty Images

Sarah O’Neill loved her job as a data scientist at the National Security Agency (NSA).

“The government before last year was what I would consider to be a model employer,” O’Neill said.


She started the job in 2019, two years after she started her transition to living as a woman.

“That wasn’t an issue at all,” she said. “Everybody was supportive.”

Everything changed in January 2025. That’s when President Donald Trump took office for a second term and signed an executive order titled “Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government.”

The order stated that the federal government would recognize only “male” and “female” genders and that they were unchangeable from birth, denying the existence of transgender people like O’Neill.

O’Neill was informed that she was no longer allowed to use a women’s restroom, and should use one aligned with her biological birth sex.

As a government employee, O’Neill was used to following rules. But this one seemed almost impossible to follow. She found a few single-stall restrooms at work and used those, but O’Neill is a woman. Using a men’s room was not appropriate.

Across the Trump administration, LGBTQ+ federal workers describe being forced to choose between their jobs and their ability to fulfill their most basic human needs.

Shannon Leary, a partner at Gilbert Employment Law, has spent the past 19 years representing federal workers in discrimination lawsuits against the federal government. Such discrimination chips away at a person’s ability to do their job, she said.

“That impacts a person on so many different levels, both personally and professionally,” she said.

There has been a steady stream of those cases across all presidential administrations, Leary said. But something has changed with the advent of the second Trump administration.

“I personally have observed an increase in potential clients reaching out,” Leary said.

It’s unknown how many LGBTQ+ federal workers are suing the Trump administration for alleged discrimination, experts said. That’s because some of the suits are public, while others have been made as confidential complaints. But over the past year, the administration has faced a number of high-profile lawsuits over the ban on LGBTQ+ pride expression and refusal to let transgender workers use bathrooms that align with their genders.

Here are the suits advocates are watching most closely in the courts:

Sarah O’Neill, NSA

O’Neill, the data scientist, is suing her agency, saying the NSA violated Title VII and the Civil Rights Act of 1964 by denying her existence as a transgender woman and creating a hostile work environment. Agency actions included “cancelling its policy recognizing her identity and right to a workplace free of unlawful harassment, prohibiting her from identifying her pronouns as female in written communications, purging references to transgender people from its materials, and barring her from using the women’s restroom at work,” her complaint alleged.

The agency did not respond to a request to comment on the lawsuit.

LeAnne Withrow, Illinois National Guard

LeAnne Withrow, a transgender woman who serves as the lead military and family readiness specialist for the Illinois National Guard, also enjoyed an accepting workplace until January 2025. Then, following Trump’s executive order, she was told she could no longer use a women’s room, she said.

Withrow has mostly made it work by using a single-stall bathroom close to her office.

“But this past week, for example, I had a two-hour meeting in a building across campus, where I have to badge in, and I’m two floors up,” she said, putting her far from the bathrooms she knew were safe to use. “It’s kind of humiliating in a way. … It feels very much like separate, but also not equal.”

Withrow filed a federal class-action lawsuit in November against the Office of Personnel Management (OPM). Withrow alleges that Trump’s order violates the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Title VII, which prohibits discrimination against transgender workers on the basis of their sex.

OPM did not respond to a request to comment on the lawsuit.

David Maltinsky, FBI

Veteran FBI employee David Maltinsky was undergoing special agent training in Quantico, Virginia, when he received a letter from Director Kash Patel informing him he had been fired for displaying political messages at work, he said.

Maltinsky’s firing came after Trump signed an executive order ending all government diversity, equity and inclusion policies. Months prior, Maltinsky displayed a Pride flag that he had been given by the FBI Los Angeles Field Office. Maltinsky said he had asked multiple supervisors about keeping the flag displayed and been told he was not in violation of a policy.

“My supervisor and I talked, and he agreed, the flag is not violating anything that he sees,” he said. Maltinsky also asked the head attorney for the Los Angeles field office.

“And he also agreed, and he said, this does not violate any FBI policy, rule or regulation.”

When Maltinsky was fired, he filed suit against Patel. A spokesperson for the FBI said in a statement that the agency does not comment on pending litigation.

Danielle Mittereder, TSA

Transportation Security Officer Danielle Mittereder sued the Department of Homeland Security in November after supervisors made her stop doing airport pat-downs because she is transgender. The removal came after Trump’s January 20 executive order declaring two biological sexes. Mittereder alleges that she had excelled in her job and never received complaints until supervisors enacted the order, which also barred her from using bathrooms that aligned with her gender at work.

DHS did not respond to a request to comment.

HRC Foundation, federal health care

The Human Rights Campaign Foundation, the educational arm of the nation’s largest LGBTQ+ rights advocacy organization, is in the midst of preparing a class-action lawsuit against OPM for blocking insurance coverage for gender-affirming care ifor federal workers. The foundation says the policy forces employees to choose between their jobs and their health care.

“The Trump administration is weaponizing medical care to push transgender public servants and their families out of their jobs and back into the closet,” Human Rights Campaign Foundation President Kelley Robinson said in a statement. “This policy is textbook discrimination and we will continue to advance this litigation until our federal employees and their families get the respect, care and dignity they deserve.”

OPM did not respond to a request to comment on the suit.


Kate Sosin reports on LGBTQ+ issues for The 19th.

A Pride Flag, a Bathroom Ban, a Job Change: LGBTQ+ Federal Workers Challenge Trump in Court was originally published by The 19th and is republished with permission.


Read More

​Christa Pike

Christa Pike in an undated photo.

(Tennessee Department of Correction/ZUMA Press/TNS)

How death penalty opponents share the blame for botched executions

“Botched” is a perfectly fine word for golf, cooking, or home repair. It seems inadequate for the taking of a life, even the life of Christa Pike, a heinous murderer.

In 1996, a jury found Pike guilty of the torture and murder of her Jobs Corps classmate, Colleen Slemmer. Pike was sentenced to death. In the 30 years since, her case has gone through at least seven major rounds of appeal and judicial review, including four petitions to the Supreme Court. All were rejected. This doesn’t even include the many more attempts to reopen or reverse her sentence that went nowhere. She is guilty, lawfully and rightly convicted.

Keep ReadingShow less
Donald Trump

President Donald Trump speaks before signing the Secure America Act in the Oval Office of the White House on June 10, 2026 in Washington, DC.

(Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images)

Federal Court Blocks Trump’s ‘Loyalty Question’ on Civil Service Job Applications

A court’s decision to block the Trump administration from including a “loyalty question” on federal job applications was a win not only for the nonpartisan civil service, but also for the communities public employees serve, said one labor leader whose union was among the plaintiffs in the case against the Office of Personnel Management.

Patrick Moran, president of the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) union, said Friday that the loyalty questions the OPM placed on job applications for public servants were a “blatantly illegal attempt to hire partisan cronies who would endanger our communities by putting politics before people, rather than dedicated, qualified public service workers.”

Keep ReadingShow less
​U.S. standard certificate of live birth application form next to flag of USA.

U.S. standard certificate of live birth application form next to flag of USA.

Getty Images

Birthright Citizenship Explained: History, SCOTUS Rulings & Executive Orders

Birthright citizenship has been part of American law for more than 150 years. As the American public continues to see challenges against its constitutionality, brought on by the Trump administration, it is important to remember why.

After the Civil War, Congress adopted the 14th Amendment in 1868 to overturn Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857), which had denied citizenship to Black Americans, dampening their federal protections. While the 13th amendment had abolished slavery a few years earlier, Free Black Americans were considered noncitizens by many, and thus had to work around a separate set of laws, meaning they could never be fully integrated as members of American society. In response to this issue, the 14th Amendment declares that all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to its jurisdiction, are citizens of the United States.

Keep ReadingShow less
Scales of justice
a golden scale with an eagle on top of it

A Real Test for “Lawfare” Must Protect Allies and Enemies Alike

“Lawfare” is becoming a word that ends arguments instead of clarifying them. When Donald Trump or his allies are prosecuted, many on the right call the case political. When the Trump administration investigates critics, many on the left call it retaliation or “score-settling.” Sometimes those accusations are justified. Sometimes they are partisan reflexes. A label that changes with the identity of the defendant is not a rule of law.

The hard cases are not the ones with a public order to punish an enemy. They are cases with mixed facts: a real investigative predicate, a politically active target, disputed timing, later changes in treatment, and no contemporaneous record the public can inspect. Those cases require something better than “trust the prosecutors” or “trust the accused.” They require an auditable standard.

Keep ReadingShow less