Cases & Advocacy
Ireland v. Hegseth
On March 17, 2025, GLAD Law and the National Center for Lesbian Rights (NCLR), with Stapleton Segal Cochran LLC and Langer Grogan & Diver P.C., filed a federal lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey seeking immediate court action to prevent two longstanding, high-ranking Air Force service members from being discharged from the military.
MoreCases & Advocacy
Talbott v. Trump
The National Center for Lesbian Rights (NCLR) and GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders (GLAD Law) filed a federal lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia challenging President Trump’s January 27, 2025, order banning transgender people from serving in the U.S. military. The suit, Talbott v. Trump, was filed on equal protection grounds on behalf of six active service members and two individuals actively seeking enlistment.
MoreCases & Advocacy
Wade v. Starbucks Corp. Amicus
On August 21, NCLR and Lambda Legal led a coalition of LGBTQ advocacy organizations and legal aid groups in submitting a proposed amicus brief urging California’s Fifth Appellate District to reverse a trial court ruling against Maddie Wade, a former employee of Starbucks in Fresno. The case is Wade v. Starbucks Corporation.
MoreCases & Advocacy
Ketcham v. Regence Bluecross Blueshield of Oregon
- Racial & Economic Justice > Rural communities
- Discrimination > Employment
- Discrimination > Healthcare
Christina Ketcham is a 60-year-old transgender woman who started her transition over four years ago and continues to experience significant distress from the incongruence between her typically masculine facial features and her identity as a woman. To alleviate that distress, Christina’s treating healthcare providers determined that certain facial feminization procedures are medically necessary to treat her gender dysphoria. But, the health insurance offered by her employer has a categorical exclusion for all facial feminization procedures.
MoreCases & Advocacy
Bostock v. Clayton County, Altitude Express, Inc. v. Zarda, and R.G. & G.R. Harris Funeral Homes, Inc. v. EEOC Amicus
On October 8, 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court heard argument in three cases that will determine whether Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, a federal law prohibiting sex discrimination in the workplace, protects LGBTQ employees.
MoreCases & Advocacy
Reed v. KRON/IBEW Local 45 Pension Plan
On August 9, 2016, the widower of a former KRON4 employee sued Young Broadcasting of San Francisco and the KRON/IBEW Local 45 Pension Plan for refusing to provide him with a spousal pension benefit even though the couple were registered domestic partners.
MoreCases & Advocacy
Wittmer v. Phillips 66 Company Amicus
Nicole Wittmer filed a lawsuit against Phillips 66 Company, alleging that the company refused to hire her for a job because she is transgender. A federal district court in Texas ruled that Title VII, a federal law that prohibiting sex discrimination in the workplace, protects transgender workers, but that Wittmer had not offered sufficient evidence that her transgender status was the reason she was not hired. Wittmer appealed.
MoreCases & Advocacy
Brome v. California Highway Patrol Amicus
Jay Brome served as an officer in the California Highway Patrol for over twenty years. As an out gay man, Jay experienced constant harassment and mistreatment from fellow officers and superiors throughout his career, including verbal insults, refusals to provide back-up, and denials of career opportunities.
MoreCases & Advocacy
Koran v. OPM
Amelie Koran is a federal employee who was denied coverage for transition-related care under the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program (FEHB). The federal Office of Personnel Management is the agency responsible for administering the FEHB, which provides health insurance coverage for millions of current and former federal employees across the country.
MoreCases & Advocacy
Horton v. Midwest Geriatric Management Amicus
Mark Horton was offered a job as Vice President of Sales and Marketing at Midwest Geriatric Management, LLC, only to have the offer withdrawn after the company learned he had a same-sex partner. A U.S. district court in Missouri dismissed his discrimination claim under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 based on a case from the 1980s stating that Title VII does not protect lesbian, gay, and bisexual people from discrimination.
More