ATLANTA (AP) 鈥 Conservatives鈥 nationwide offensive against transgender care, earlier focused on young people, is increasingly trying to cut off access for transgender adults.
With 2025 state legislative sessions still young, bills have been introduced to cut off public funding for gender affirming care for adults in at least 10 states. Georgia became the first state to move forward this year, with a panel voting 6-3 Tuesday to advance a bill to the full Senate despite pleas from public employees who would lose insurance benefits.
鈥淚t is a slap in the face to reward that service by stripping us of the health care access that we desperately need,鈥 said Carrie Scott, a lawyer for the state and transgender woman.
The panel voted hours after a Georgia county asked an appeals court to overturn an order to pay for gender affirming care for a sheriff鈥檚 deputy.
Other states have already tried to restrict care for transgender adults. Wisconsin Gov. Tony Evers, a Democrat, vetoed a bill last year that would have banned Medicaid spending on some gender affirming care. Former Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine, a Republican, on adult care before his executive order was rolled back. And a 2023 Florida law health care related to transitioning, mandating in-person appointments.
This year, bills have been introduced not only in Georgia, but Arizona, Connecticut, Kentucky, Montana, Mississippi, Oklahoma, Texas and Virginia.
LGBTQ+ advocates say Republican legislators are emboldened by targeting transgender and nonbinary people. Former President Joe Biden, by contrast, supported transgender rights.
Carl Charles, an attorney for gay rights group Lambda Legal, said Trump鈥檚 actions are 鈥渕arching orders鈥 to Republican legislators.
鈥淐ertainly the states are feeling emboldened by the maelstrom of Trump鈥檚 anti-trans orders from the White House,鈥 Charles said.
would ban spending state money on gender affirming care through state employee health plans, Medicaid and prisons.
鈥淲hat this bill says is we are not going to spend state taxpayer dollars on transgender surgeries in our state," Republican Sen. Blake Tillery of Vidalia, the sponsor, told the Senate Insurance and Labor Committee.
Earlier Tuesday in a nearby courtroom, Houston County Sheriff's Sgt. Anna Lange watched as lawyers clashed before the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals over whether her county鈥檚 insurance plan must keep paying gender affirming care benefits .
鈥淭rans people are people, and we deserve to be treated just like everybody else,鈥 Lange said afterward.
Like Lange, Georgia state employees sued for benefits, with advocates covering , and state employees.
Scott and Khara Hayden, a transgender woman who is an information technology specialist, both testified they might leave state employment if benefits end on Jan. 1, 2026, as the bill proposes.
鈥淚f you approve this bill, essentially you鈥檙e going to take away the care I need to continue living," Hayden testified, saying a lack of hormone therapy would force her into early menopause.
The bill may have trouble passing the Georgia House, though.
State House Speaker Jon Burns, a Newington Republican, repeated again Tuesday that the only transgender-related legislation he backs this year is a bill to ban transgender girls and women from playing school and college sports. He said he foresees a 鈥渧ery narrow focus鈥 on that measure.
The health bill explicitly blames for settling the state employees鈥 lawsuit in 2023. Tillery, the bill鈥檚 sponsor, is an ally of Republican Lt. Gov. Burt Jones, who is expected to run for governor in 2026 against Carr.
Carr has rejected the idea that he favors benefits for transgender people, with spokesperson Kara Murray saying he has a 鈥渓ong track record鈥 of opposing them.
The state and employees who litigated for benefits are divided on whether a new law could reverse legal settlements. Plaintiffs say they made binding contracts, which includes a provision saying the state won鈥檛 reimpose the prohibition. But Tillery argues each year is a new health insurance contract and the state can change the terms.
鈥淚t鈥檚 our proper duty to write the law and it鈥檚 the court鈥檚 duty to interpret that law," Tillery said.
Even if the state can scrap the settlements, opponents say they'd sue again to strike down unconstitutional denial of benefits to transgender people because of their sex. that under a 1964 civil rights law, employers couldn't discriminate against lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender employees 鈥渂ecause of sex.鈥
鈥淚t鈥檚 discriminatory, 100%, that they鈥檙e specifically targeting the transgender individuals and the care that they need,鈥 Hayden said.
