In a landmark decision on Wednesday, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld a Tennessee law restricting medical treatments — like puberty blockers and hormone therapy — for transgender minors.

Twenty-six other states have laws with similar restrictions to Tennessee. With this latest news, LGBTQ+ advocates say they expect to see more people traveling to Minnesota, and even moving to Minnesota to seek gender-affirming care.

“We are seeing a just plethoria of folks moving here to Minnesota just to get basic human care,” said Andi Otto, executive director of Twin Cities Pride.

House Republicans in Minnesota introduced a similar bill this past session banning gender-affirming care, but it didn’t make it out of committee.

While advocates say there’s fear Minnesota could see similar restrictions, Otto said Minnesota’s 2023 trans refuge bill gives him reassurance.

“I continue to have faith in our legislators and our government to make those decisions and keep Minnesota exactly what it’s supposed to be, and that’s a state that you’re free to be yourself,” Otto said.

Also on Wednesday, it was also announced the 988 Suicide and Crisis Lifeline would no longer connect those in need of help to the Trevor Project, which helps LGBTQ+ individuals in crisis.

“It’s really tragic to have these two decisions come on the same day,” said Kat Rohn, executive director for OutFront Minnesota. “To see that actually enacted and moved forward is a really hurtful blow to kids who need all the support they can get.”

Otto said the timing of this announcement during Pride Month is not a coincidence.

In the wake of Donald Trump’s election as president, transgender people are left wondering what lies ahead. For this vulnerable community, a Trump administration signals potential disaster: the candidate just won his election after $215 million in anti-trans ads targeting this small minority—a staggering amount that eclipsed spending on other issue-based ads. Now, transgender individuals are searching for ways to protect themselves under a federal government that may view them as top “enemies from within,” a term Trump has used to describe those on the left.

I spoke with experts in transgender care and dozens of transgender individuals to identify steps the community can take now to prepare for a Trump presidency. Trump has pledged numerous actions against transgender people, from investigating educators to banning gender-affirming care for youth and ending legal recognition for transgender individuals. While some of these measures may take time to implement, others could happen swiftly. For instance, the upcoming December budget negotiations are likely to include anti-trans and anti-LGBTQ+ amendments, which Democrats may accept to avoid a government shutdown.

For transgender people and their supporters, being prepared is essential. Here are practical steps the community should consider in the coming weeks to safeguard themselves against these anticipated challenges.

Obtaining or updating your passport.

Obtaining a federal passport is a crucial step for transgender individuals, as it serves as a valid ID in most places and is necessary for international travel. Passports also let you change your gender marker via a simple selection checkbox, making the process of having your official gender marker hassle-free. This last point is especially important—anticipated federal crackdowns could soon make it impossible to update your gender marker on federal documents and might even affect state IDs. Passports are valid for ten years, and some states allow you to align your gender marker with the one on your passport, making this action essential, even if you don’t plan to travel internationally. And should the need for travel arise, you’ll be grateful you took this precaution.

Many transgender people I’ve spoken to have already begun this process. One family, hoping to secure a passport before federal rules change, opted for the expedited service. Ellie, the mother of a transgender teen, shared, “I’m determined to keep my son safe and alive, and we will do everything humanly possible to make that happen.” She noted that they are researching options for moving internationally if gender-affirming care is banned federally, with Spain as their top choice. For transgender individuals, expedited passports are an important consideration to ensure they receive their documents before Trump’s inauguration. Although they cost a bit more, expedited passports are processed much faster.

Some observed a rise in the number of LGBTQ+ people seeking passports in the election’s immediate aftermath. Andromeda, a transgender woman, noted, “At the post office, there were five people in line for passports. Four of us were trans.” She described the atmosphere as “very sullen,” adding, “We were all very nervous but being very strong about it.”

Updating state documents and IDs.

This step is crucial, as transgender people will need as many documents as possible that reflect their correct gender marker to navigate potential laws and regulations targeting them. Although most anti-trans laws specify that legal recognition of sex must align with the sex recorded at or near birth, enforcing these provisions is often challenging. In practice, having licenses and IDs that display an accurate gender marker can help transgender individuals avoid negative interactions and even defuse tense situations with officials. Additionally, obtaining such documentation may become more difficult in the future—Trump could, for instance, leverage laws like the Real ID Act to push for bans on correct gender markers on driver’s licenses.

Many transgender individuals have started this process quickly, anticipating that their opportunity to do so may soon disappear. One such person in South Dakota, Cole, shared, “I need to get my name and marker officially changed before I am barred from the chance.” In South Dakota, the process is particularly onerous, requiring a court order or a signed affidavit from a physician. Cole is concerned that completing it may become impossible once Trump takes office.

Maintaining a supply of medication.

Some individuals are taking steps to secure their access to gender-affirming medications, though this approach carries potential legal challenges. The Trump administration has indicated plans to sue pharmaceutical companies providing gender-affirming care, making medication access disruption a real possibility. Additionally, federal funding bans, threats, and investigations could further complicate access. States like California have announced intentions to enact laws protecting LGBTQ+ individuals from such federal actions. For individuals, practical methods to maintain a medication supply include underdosing to build an emergency reserve, working with a physician willing to prescribe extra medication, or obtaining hormones through online sources, though it is important to note that these steps are not without legal or personal risks.

Nevertheless, many individuals reported taking these precautionary steps. One person, who asked to remain anonymous, shared that her doctor advised her she could continue using estradiol vials beyond four injections, contrary to prior instructions to discard them after four uses. This adjustment has allowed her to build up a supply that could last through a Trump presidency. Another respondent mentioned underdosing her estradiol to justify higher prescription doses, enabling her to maintain a backup supply in case of disruptions.

Changing your social security office gender marker.

This is a step many people overlook, as they may not realize that the Social Security Administration maintains a gender marker on file. If future policies restrict the ability to update identification documents, updating your gender marker with Social Security could help prevent mismatches that might flag your identification within federal systems. The process is straightforward, with an online portal explaining which form to complete and where to submit it. Most people will need to bring the form to their local Social Security office. Fortunately, changing one’s gender marker is as simple as checking a box—no court orders or medical documentation required—making it a relatively quick step to complete.

Consider moving now, if you want to.

For many, relocating is a significant and complex decision—and it’s important to acknowledge that moving isn’t a viable option for a large portion of the queer community. Financial limitations, legal or personal circumstances, and a desire to stay and fight all keep many people rooted in their home states. However, for those considering a move, this may be an opportune moment to finalize those plans. Anti-trans legislation and actions could escalate quickly, potentially even before Biden’s presidency concludes, especially with looming budget negotiations. While the exact scope of potential executive actions remains uncertain, many of the steps outlined here may become far more challenging once such actions are in place.

Many people I’ve spoken with have already decided to move. Sarah, a mother of a trans child from Texas, shared that she plans to relocate to Denver as soon as her house sells. “We’ve discussed moving for several years, and this is the push we needed, I guess,” she said. When asked why she chose Colorado, she explained, “We’re hopeful that, in a blue state with shield laws, there will be some resistance to any national policies. For instance, when Biden made the Title IX changes, Texas fought back, so we didn’t get those protections. I’m hoping it would be like that, but in reverse. It’s also why we’ll rent instead of buying—if another move is necessary, we want to be able to pick up quickly and go.”

Another individual, Tawj, mentioned that they’ve already formed a small caravan of queer people saving and preparing to move to a blue state before the transfer of power. “It’s a small group of five for now… we’re all pooling money to make the move cheaper.”

For Chelsey, a transgender girl who is planning on moving next year, she spoke of her Grandmother’s experiences in Nazi Germany as a major influencing factor, stating, “My grandmother fled Germany and she saw her sister get shot by the Nazis. The stories that I remember from her were, we were never prepared to flee. We got complacent and even with organizing which is good and important. It’s also important to be prepared to flee.”

To determine which state is safe to move to, watch for updates to my Trans Legislative Risk Assessment Map.

Make decisions around staying or going “stealth.”

A recurring topic in discussions about preparing for a Trump administration is the role that going or staying “stealth” may play in ensuring safety. For transgender individuals, “stealth” refers to living in one’s gender identity without disclosing that one is transgender. For many, this involves extra attention to makeup and voice training to pass as cisgender and blend in. For transgender youth, it often means not informing school officials about their gender identity. Such steps may become critical, as schools could feel pressured by the Trump administration to enforce restrictions on trans youth, even in blue states. For trans adults, staying stealth could also offer a measure of safety in the face of increasingly common bathroom regulations.

Many transgender people I spoke with had mixed feelings about going “stealth” under a Trump administration. Some have concluded that it’s the safest option for them, while others have chosen to remain visible, believing that visibility will be essential in the fight for transgender rights. Still others feel that stealth simply isn’t an option for them.

Relying on local community allies.

One essential action transgender people and allies can take is to support community organizations, legal funds, and other resources. Historically, when restrictive laws have targeted the LGBTQ+ community, it has been crucial to connect with groups of LGBTQ+ individuals who can provide mutual support and safety. When choosing organizations to support, state and local groups are particularly valuable, as they offer the most current information on relevant laws and can advise on the best ways to address new challenges under a Trump administration. These organizations are also well-positioned to navigate the specific legal processes and advocacy opportunities within local communities.

The Trump administration is expected to bring significant legal threats for transgender people, but there are steps that can be taken now to mitigate these risks. With a closing window to act before Trump’s inauguration, these measures are time-sensitive. Early preparation may be the difference between enduring four years of intensified crackdowns on trans and queer communities—or facing the brunt of an administration determined to restrict their rights. Taking steps now is essential for those looking to safeguard their futures.

With WorldPride just weeks away, organizers in Washington, D.C., are walking a difficult line — welcoming the world to the nation’s capital while acknowledging the grim reality facing transgender people traveling to the United States under the Trump administration.

On Friday, the Capital Pride Alliance, which is producing WorldPride 2025, released new guidance for international visitors. The guidance urges all travelers—especially trans and nonbinary people—to stay informed, travel cautiously, and understand the potential risks before coming to D.C. The festivities begin on May 17 and go through June 8.

Organizers stressed that the decision to attend WorldPride must be made thoughtfully, particularly for trans travelers facing new restrictions on documentation and travel under federal policies.

“We recommend that travelers considering entry to the United States make an informed decision based on the potential risks involved, as we, alongside advocates and partner organizations, continue to actively navigate the measures being put in place by the current federal administration,” the group said.

“WorldPride is happening at a pivotal time, and we are working to unite voices worldwide in support of our movement and our lives as the LGBTQ+ community continues its fight for equality, visibility, and justice,” the Capital Pride Alliance added. “Hosting this historic event in the U.S. capital – a place that has been so important to the movement – is a stark reminder that LGBTQ+ people exist and belong everywhere.”

Passports with an “X” gender marker remain valid for travel under international standards, but a recent U.S. State Department memo now requires visa applicants to list their sex assigned at birth — a change that could impact some trans and nonbinary travelers. Organizers encouraged all visitors to consult official sources and seek legal guidance as needed.

The WorldPride D.C. 2025 Health and Safety webpage outlines a wide range of security measures and community resources. It also provides updated safety information.

Organizers noted that Washington, D.C., has a long history of successfully hosting large-scale, high-security events and is working closely with local, federal, and regional partners—including the Metropolitan Police Department, the Department of Homeland Security, the U.S. Capitol Police, and the National Park Service—to ensure safety.

According to the WorldPride Health and Safety site, preparations include pre-event surveillance, on-site police, private security, advanced life support stations, roving medic teams, aerial surveillance, anti-scaling systems, and secure perimeters for major events like the two-day street festival.

Workshops on safety topics—including active shooter response, NARCAN distribution, de-escalation training, and anti-trafficking awareness—are also being offered to both residents and visitors in the lead-up to WorldPride.

District officials echoed the message of welcome while underscoring their commitment to safety.

The Advocate sent a detailed list of questions to D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser’s office on Saturday, seeking the mayor’s direct response to concerns about the safety of transgender residents and visitors, the city’s engagement with the federal government, and what message this moment sends to the world. The Mayor’s Office of LGBTQ Affairs provided a statement highlighting the city’s preparations and commitment to ensuring a safe and inclusive WorldPride.

“We are proud to welcome more than 3 million visitors to Washington, DC, for WorldPride 2025,” the statement read. “Our government agencies are working diligently with community organizers to ensure that WorldPride is a safe, accessible, and bold celebration of our community. We are prepared and committed to supporting WorldPride events, including the Human Rights Conference, parades, festivals, high-heel races, sports tournaments, and more.”

The guidance comes after Capital Pride Alliance executive director Ryan Bos told regional leaders this week that organizers were weighing whether to issue a formal travel advisory specifically for trans visitors. That conversation sparked widespread concern, highlighting the unprecedented challenges facing LGBTQ+ people ahead of WorldPride.

Germany and several other countries have already issued a formal travel warning for its trans and nonbinary citizens traveling to the U.S., citing federal restrictions on gender recognition and documentation. Immigration advocates have warned that a State Department memo signed by Secretary of State Marco Rubio could functionally ban trans travelers from obtaining U.S. visas, especially for international LGBTQ+ events like WorldPride.

Despite the risks, Pride organizers made clear their message is rooted in resilience and global visibility.

“Pride is a global movement,” the Capital Pride Alliance said. “For those who are able, please join us in Washington, D.C. March with us on Sunday, June 8, at the International March and Rally. Moreover, show up and support Pride events all around the globe so that we remain visible, vigilant, and heard.”

Donald Trump made frequent promises during his 2024 presidential campaign to cut education funding to schools whose instruction did not align with his views of race and gender.

Now that he has won the election, some advocates are gearing up to push back on those efforts, which they say could have a chilling effect on Minnesota schools.

“On Day 1, I will sign a new executive order to cut federal funding. We are going to cut federal funding for any school pushing critical race theory, transgender insanity, and other inappropriate racial, sexual, or political content onto the shoulders of our children,” Trump said in a July rally in St. Cloud, as the crowd behind him roared in approval.

St. Cloud wasn’t the only place Trump made that promise. The Washington Post identified 82 times that Trump promised to cut funding to schools teaching “critical race theory” or “transgender insanity” — making it his most repeated campaign promise for his first day in office.

So what does that promise mean for Minnesota K-12 schools? In recent years, Minnesota has taken strides to include ethnic studies in school curriculum, which advocates say will teach more robust histories of different racial and ethnic groups, though some conservative critics have lambasted the field as “critical race theory.” Minnesota law also protects transgender students, including explicit rights for trans students to use locker rooms and bathrooms that align with their gender identity.

Minnesota schools have stronger protection than many other states from federal interference on these issues, experts told Sahan Journal.

But even empty threats from the Trump administration to cut off federal funding could have a chilling effect on schools and teachers.

“I worry about self-censorship among teachers and educators concerned about threats of enforcement, even though those threats are very unlikely to ever materialize because they’re not well-grounded in civil rights law and regulations,” said Rachel Perera, a fellow in governance studies at the Washington, D.C.-based Brookings Institution.

Kat Rohn, executive director of OutFront Minnesota, the state’s largest LGBTQ+ advocacy organization, advised school districts to “not overcomply.”

“The heart of the dangerous rhetoric that’s being used here in large part, I think, is an attempt to scare schools and educators away from doing what is best and what is right for students in their districts,” Rohn said.

Christy Hall, senior staff attorney at St. Paul-based advocacy organization Gender Justice, agreed.

“Don’t assume that just because somebody tweets, you’re going to get your federal funding removed, that you have to immediately change your policies, or somebody’s going to come in the next day and remove federal funding,” she said. “There are enforcement mechanisms that the federal government must follow before it can do that.”

Experts who spoke with Sahan Journal expected Trump to remove federal protections for transgender students, though they said those students would likely still be protected under Minnesota law.

They also said he could use the Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights to investigate race and gender complaints, though they said changing the definition of discrimination on the basis of race or sex is not as straightforward as Trump indicates. On other issues, like school curriculum, presidential authority is less clear.

Still, Trump may try to circumvent typical processes and use the power of the bully pulpit to enforce compliance with his vision, whether or not he has a legal pathway to do so. And an increasingly conservative federal judiciary means it’s not easy to predict how courts might rule on any unprecedented executive actions that come before them.

Here’s what Minnesota school districts need to know.

How can a president cut off funds to schools?

A presidential administration has two primary mechanisms for cutting off federal funding to schools: through Congressional action and through enforcement of civil rights laws.

Perera, of the Brookings Institution, said that schools are largely a product of state and local government, and that federal funding has historically been presidents’ primary tool to advance their education policy agendas. She pointed to school desegregation, educational access for students with disabilities, and standardized testing under No Child Left Behind. In those instances, laws passed by Congress specified circumstances under which the government could cut off funding.

For example, last summer the U.S. Department of Education warned Minnesota that its special education teacher licensure system did not meet federal requirements under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. If Minnesota failed to address this issue, the federal government warned, the state could lose more than $200 million annually. Ultimately, the state developed a plan to tweak the licensure system, which the U.S. Department of Education approved; Minnesota did not lose any federal funds.

“Those formulas are written into law,” Perera said. “They can’t be changed through the power of the executive.”

Trump will have Republican majorities in both chambers of Congress as he begins his second term. Still, Perera sees an uphill battle for additional conditions on education funding.

“To pass new legislation, they would need 60 votes in the Senate, which they won’t have, or they would need to get rid of the filibuster,” she said. “They can’t do that with a simple majority. They cannot do that with the budget reconciliation process.”

A president also cannot cut off federal funds to schools via executive order.

“If Trump were to issue an executive order on Day 1 that says any state that teaches X, Y and Z no longer gets federal funding, I would imagine that states like Minnesota would sue the federal government,” said Liliana Zaragoza, associate professor and director of the Racial Justice Law Clinic at the University of Minnesota Law School.

Could Trump revoke federal funds using civil rights enforcement?

Another presidential mechanism for revoking school funding is civil rights enforcement. The Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights investigates complaints of discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, age, or disability. The Office of Civil Rights can revoke funding as the result of an investigation, after a long process.

Trump has said he would use civil rights enforcement to impose consequences on schools and teachers that do not comply with his agenda.

“My Department of Education will inform states and school districts that if any teacher or school official suggests to a child that they could be trapped in the wrong body, they will be faced with severe consequences, including potential civil rights violations for sex discrimination, and the elimination of federal funding,” he said in a February 2023 video.

School districts typically have many opportunities to address the federal government’s grievances before losing funding. For example, in August, Minneapolis Public Schools reached an agreement with the Office of Civil Rights stemming from a 2022 complaint over unequal treatment of girls’ sports under Title IX, which bans sex discrimination in schools. The district agreed to appoint a Title IX athletics compliance coordinator and develop a plan to provide equal athletics accommodations for male and female students.

During President Joe Biden’s administration, the Office of Civil Rights has reached nine agreements with school districts or universities in Minnesota. Five of these agreements focused on discrimination on the basis of disability, three centered on sex-based discrimination, and one agreement addressed racial discrimination.

This investigation process is “reactive,” Perera said. Although the Office of Civil Rights is “severely underfunded,” it is required to investigate every complaint that it receives. That means its ability to proactively find violations of civil rights law is limited.

In order for Trump to use Office of Civil Rights enforcement to target schools’ diversity practices or transgender students, he would have to change the definitions of race- and sex-based discrimination. He would first issue “non-binding guidance,” said Hall, at Gender Justice. Changing regulations in a legally binding way would entail a lengthy process that involves a public notice and comment period and a review from the Office of Management and Budget, she said.

“I don’t see a real risk that that’s happening on Day 1,” Hall said.

Perera shared a similar analysis. “I think they will leverage non-binding guidance to try to intimidate schools and try to get schools to comply without the need for enforcement,” she said.

Indeed, it’s rare for the federal government to actually revoke school funding.

A U.S. Department of Education spokesperson told Sahan Journal that the agency’s Office of Civil Rights last terminated federal funds to a school district over a Title IX violation in 1992. That decision, revoking funding to the Capistrano Unified School District in California, went through a lengthy review process and was ultimately ordered by an administrative law judge. Nearly eight years passed between the initial complaint to the Office of Civil Rights and the final approval of the judicial order revoking federal funds.

Minnesota’s revised social studies standards, which include ethnic studies, go into effect in the 2026-2027 school year. A separate law also goes into effect that year which will require all Minnesota high schools to offer a standalone ethnic studies course.

Some school districts, including Minneapolis, St. Paul, and Rochester, already offer ethnic studies courses. Students who advocated for these standards have told Sahan Journal these classes helped them learn about their own cultural histories and their classmates’ backgrounds, and have helped them feel more engaged at school.

But as Minnesota debated updates to the state social studies standards, some conservative critics described the proposed ethnic studies rules as “critical race theory,” a legal academic concept for analyzing systemic racism. And Trump has repeatedly said he would revoke funding for schools teaching “critical race theory.”

The Trump administration could investigate the way schools teach about race and gender. But experts say that curriculum is the purview of state and local governments.

“The federal government has no business in curricular decisions at the local level, even when it comes to federal civil rights enforcement,” Perera said. “Historically, leadership at the Department of Education has been very explicit that we do not touch curriculum.”

Catherine Ahlin-Halverson, a staff attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union of Minnesota, said she expected Trump to try to challenge curricular standards, but thought Minnesota’s laws would stand up in court. “We can expect the federal government to attempt to weaponize their power against these kinds of curriculum guidelines,” she said. “I hope they should be upheld and embraced here in Minnesota under our state education laws and our Human Rights Act and our constitution.”

Catrin Wigfall, a policy fellow at the Center of the American Experiment, a conservative think tank that advocated against Minnesota’s ethnic studies standards, said she expected curriculum control to remain local.

“With voters saying ‘no thanks’ to a Harris-Walz administration, ethnic studies will likely remain where it has been — at the state level versus a focus at the federal level,” Wigfall said in an email. “Unfortunately, for Minnesota, this means continued statewide focus on a critical/liberated version of ethnic studies that imposes a narrow ideology and polarizes students.”

Instead, she suggested, Trump could focus on school choice.

“Perhaps the incoming administration will pursue a tax-credit scholarship option that would finally help Minnesota students stuck in failing schools access better options,” Wigfall said. “That’s something that has not been a focus of the state that would have positive impacts on education.”

How might the Trump administration change protections for LGBTQ kids?

One threat that Trump has the clear legal ability to act on: rolling back protections for transgender students.

“One thing that we expect the Trump administration to do is rescind regulations and interpretations of federal law that protect the LGBTQ+ community from discrimination,” said Ahlin-Halverson of the ACLU.

Biden’s Department of Education adopted a more expansive definition of Title IX, which includes discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity in the definition of sex discrimination. Under Biden’s Title IX rule, schools must call students by their preferred pronouns and allow them to use the bathrooms that align with their gender identity. Failing to do so could trigger an Office of Civil Rights investigation and ultimately cause them to lose funding. That rule went into effect in August, after undergoing the full regulatory process.

“Quite literally for states that lack specific state-based nondiscrimination protections, this is the difference between having any protections in an educational setting for LGBTQ students and none,” said Rohn of OutFront Minnesota.

But some states sued, saying that Biden had overstepped his authority to reinterpret a longstanding law. Federal courts blocked the new regulations from going into effect in 26 states. Hall, of Gender Justice, said she expects the Trump administration to agree to a nationwide stay on Biden’s new Title IX regulations, which would effectively void them for the whole country.

Another likely Trump target: transgender kids participating in sports.

Biden proposed new Title IX regulations over transgender students’ access to athletics, prohibiting state bans but allowing targeted restrictions. But he put off finalizing the rule until after the election. If Biden does not finalize his rule before leaving office, Hall said, Trump will be able to ride the coattails of Biden’s lengthy process, inserting his own rule as final — however different it may be from what Biden proposed and sought comment on.

The U.S. Department of Education said it had no updated information on whether or when this rule will be finalized.

In Minnesota, Hall does not foresee much impact from a return to Trump’s previous Title IX policy. Nor does Rohn.

“What we encourage folks to take heart in is that Minnesota’s Human Rights Act has protected LGBTQ students in educational spaces since 1993,” Rohn said. “Those protections remain solid. They remain in effect. They do not change.”

However, Rohn said, it’s possible that the Trump administration could try to enforce its interpretation of Title IX through litigation, in an attempt to force states with better LGBTQ protections to drop them. And it’s also possible that Minnesota school districts will find the change in federal guidance confusing. Some administrators may not understand their obligations under the Minnesota Human Rights Act, or prefer to ignore them.

And that confusion increases the chance for harm to students, said Ahlin-Halverson of the ACLU. If a school administrator mishandles a request to ban a book or remove a Pride flag from a wall, a student can be deeply harmed — even if the decision is later reversed.

The ACLU of Minnesota called on Governor Tim Walz to call a special legislative session while both chambers of the Legislature are still fully controlled by Democrats. Among their priorities: requiring schools to develop a gender inclusion policy to codify protections for transgender and nonbinary students. Ahlin-Halverson also said she worries about attempts from the federal government to obtain school information about transgender and nonbinary students, and said she’d like to see stronger data privacy laws.

“While we can seek to enforce and protect those students through litigation, it does not prevent that initial harm that can be devastating,” Ahlin-Halverson said. “Being at the center of a war regarding your existence is devastating to a student, even if we ultimately are able to protect their rights in Minnesota through the court system.”

Minnesota laws stand

So how should schools approach the next Trump administration?

The most important thing to remember, Rohn said, is that Minnesota law should protect students — regardless of what happens at the federal level.

“Minnesota law is still the law and that we still have the expectations set out by the law in schools,” Rohn said. “As long as that holds, Minnesota families can be assured that we have strong and robust protections that will ensure that LGBTQ students and other folks receive fair and appropriate education here in this state. But we are concerned that that could be challenged by a really aggressive administration. And we hope that folks will step up and do the right thing, if that does come to pass.”

After Target made the decision to drop diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives, Minnesota’s largest Pride festival decided to drop them as a sponsor. Now, Twin Cities Pride has more funding than they started with.

Target issued a memo on Friday announcing the end of its three-year DEI goals, including its Racial Equity Action and Change (REACH) program and “all external diversity-focused survey’s including HRC’s Corporate Equality index.” The Human Rights Campaign effort, which provides benchmarks on corporate policies relevant to LGBTQ+ employees, previously gave Target a score of 100 percent, dubbing the company a “Leader in LGBTQ+ Workplace Inclusion.”

In response, the largest Pride organization in Minnesota and the largest free Pride celebration in the United States, Twin Cities Pride, announced this week that it would be dropping Target as a sponsor for its 2025 events. The company had initially pledged $50,000, and had been involved in Pride celebrations for around two decades.

TCP executive director Andi Otto tells The Advocate that Target executives called him before their announcement, as they “wanted me to hear it from them before it had hit mainstream media.” The company insisted that “they were still very much committed to being at Pride and very much committed to sponsoring and continuing to support our year-round programming.”

Target was not backing down on its $50,000 pledge, but Otto says that TCP and their allies still saw the move as a betrayal, as the company is “taking away safety for the community not only in their employees, but in their suppliers.” As the community was “looking to us to hold them accountable,” TCP’s board made the decision to remove Target as a sponsor.

“This isn’t about the money,” Otto says. “Because if the money wasn’t there, would we even be questioning this decision? The answer is no. The reality of it is, is that it’s the right thing to do for our community.”

The end of DEI programs and LGBTQ+ inclusivity initiatives marks a significant shift for the Minnesota-based company, which once withstood protests from hate groups over its inclusive bathroom policies and Pride displays. However, the change was not sudden, as Target pulled some of its Pride Month merchandise in 2023 amid threats and violent protests in stores.

Target is among over a dozen major companies that have ended their DEI initiatives in the past year. Meta announced the end of its DEI programs by citing the shifting “legal and policy landscape surrounding diversity, equity and inclusion efforts in the United States.” McDonald’s also cited the Supreme Court decision against affirmative action, as well as changes among “other companies.”

Target executives said in their public statement and in private statements to Otto that the decision to end DEI programs was “due to changes in the landscape” — a nod to the Trump Administration, which has taken a hard stance against DEI in its first weeks by signing executive orders firing government employees and rescinding 1960s civil rights protections.

As Target had long stood by DEI and LGBTQ+ initiatives when it was politically beneficial, Otto says that the company’s reason for ending them “just didn’t sit right with us.”

“A lot of companies that are overturning [DEI] are doing it out of fear,” Otto says. “They look ahead and say, ‘This is what the next four years is going to be like.’ If we’re standing up for the diversity and inclusion, then we’re going to be, ironically, in the minority.”

“It’s crazy when you truly think about it — standing up for a minority group of folks, but when the other shoe drops, you don’t actually want to be part of that group,” he adds.

Companies’ willingness to abandon the LGBTQ+ community contributes to the long-standing debate among activists over “Rainbow Capitalism,” which refers to the trend of companies marketing to or profiting off the queer community without meaningfully supporting them. Examples include Disney using a rainbow logo while cancelling or censoring LGBTQ+ projects, Netflix claiming to support LGBTQ+ people while hosting Dave Chapelle’s harmful jokes about transgender people, or Target scaling back Pride displays after pressure from extremists despite decades of precedent.

“I get a lot of push back about why we have sponsors at Pride. Pride was a protest, et cetera. But those sponsors allow me to do things,” Otto says, adding, “I get to pay every performer on the stage. I get to have a rainbow wardrobe, free personal care items, free clothing. We fed 300 people a holiday meal for free. … It allows us to have smaller costs for small businesses and LGBTQ and BIPOC businesses at our festival.”

While Otto did not believe it would be too challenging to find a replacement for Target, he “did not expect to be paid forward by the community.” TCP made the money back in less than 24 hours, raising nearly $78,000 just from individual donors as of Wednesday morning. Other organizations offering grants or sponsorships have brought that total to well over $100,000 — more than twice what Target promised.

“Everybody’s talking about eggs at this point. I know people are watching their money very closely, and I don’t blame them. Me as an individual, I’m doing the same thing,” Otto says. “So, I didn’t expect this outcome. It’s inspiring.”

Otto, who has heard from many community members that have decided to no longer shop at companies ditching DEI, emphasizes that “I’m not asking you to boycott Target — I’m asking you to make the best decision for your family.” Still, he hopes “companies see this and realize that this is going to cause people to really start selecting where they’re gonna shop.”

“I won’t close the door on Target. I want them to show their true colors, whatever that looks like in their world,” Otto says. “And my hope is that in 2026, they can come back. They can be loud, they can be proud of what they’ve done with their company, and we can move forward. But I need to see that beforehand.”