LGBTQ rights in Texas

{{See also|Sodomy laws in the United States#State laws prior to 2003 invalidation|l1=Sodomy laws in the United States before 2003}}

Until the U.S. Supreme Court in June 2003 declared sodomy laws unconstitutional in Lawrence v. Texas, sodomy was a criminal offense in Texas, termed "deviate sexual intercourse".{{citation |publisher=Statutes.legis.state.tx.us |access-date=December 5, 2013|url=http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/PE/htm/PE.21.htm#21.01 |title=Section 21.01(1) of the Texas Penal Code}}{{citation|url=http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/PE/htm/PE.12.htm#12.23 |title=Section 12.23 of the Texas Penal Code |publisher=Statutes.legis.state.tx.us |access-date=December 5, 2013}} As of 2023, Texas is one of the three states where dormant sodomy laws only apply to same-sex acts, alongside Kentucky and Kansas.{{cite news|work=SDGLN|date=April 19, 2013 |url=http://sdgln.com/news/2013/04/19/montana-eliminates-obsolete-sodomy-law|title=Montana axes obsolete sodomy law}}{{cite news|url=https://www.nydailynews.com/amp/news/national/montana-formally-decriminalizes-gay-sex-article-1.1321718|title=Montana formally decriminalizes gay sex|work=Daily News|date=April 19, 2013}} Several bills intended to repeal the sodomy ban have been introduced since Lawrence. A bill repealing the state's law banning LGB sexuality was passed by the Texas House in 2025.{{Cite news|url=https://www.texasobserver.org/seven-anti-lgbt-laws-that-remain-on-texas-books/|title=Seven Anti-LGBT Laws That Remain on Texas' Books|date=December 13, 2016|newspaper=The Texas Observer}}

Texas provides an affirmative defense to a person who has engaged in unlawful sexual contact with a child under 17 years of age, if the person is not more than three years older than the child or a spouse of the child, so long as the person is not of the child's same sex.{{citation|url=http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/PE/htm/PE.21.htm#21.11 |title=Texas Penal Code sec. 21.11(b) |publisher=Statutes.legis.state.tx.us |access-date=February 9, 2025}} There has been no published constitutional challenge of this statute since the 2015 U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges, in which the court held that same-sex marriage bans breach the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.Obergefell v. Hodges, 135 S. Ct. 2584 (2015) Texas has been the only state to maintain such a distinction on its books since the Kansas Supreme Court found a similar Kansas statute to be unconstitutional in 2005.{{cite news|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/10/21/AR2005102101680.html |title=Bias Ruled in Law On Same-Sex Rape |author1= Charles Lane |work=Washingtonpost.com |date= October 22, 2005|access-date=December 5, 2013}} During the Legislature's 2013 regular session, House Bill 2403,{{citation|url=http://www.legis.state.tx.us/tlodocs/83R/billtext/pdf/HB02403I.pdf#navpanes=0 |title=House Bill 2403 - Introduced Text, 83rd Legislature, Regular Session, 2013 |access-date=December 5, 2013}} introduced by Representative Mary González, House Bill 3322,{{citation|url=http://www.legis.state.tx.us/tlodocs/83R/billtext/pdf/HB03322I.pdf#navpanes=0 |title=House Bill 3322 - Introduced Text, 83rd Legislature, Regular Session, 2013 |access-date=December 5, 2013}} introduced by Representative Coleman, and Senate Bill 1316,{{citation|url=http://www.legis.state.tx.us/tlodocs/83R/billtext/pdf/SB01316I.pdf#navpanes=0 |title=Senate Bill 1316 - Introduced Text, 83rd Legislature, Regular Session, 2013 |access-date=December 5, 2013}} introduced by Senator John Whitmire, would have repealed this distinction; however, none of these bills was passed by its chamber of origin.{{citation|url=http://www.legis.state.tx.us/billlookup/Actions.aspx?LegSess=83R&Bill=HB2403 |title=House Bill 2403 History, 83rd Legislature, Regular Session, 2013 |publisher=Legis.state.tx.us |access-date=December 5, 2013}}{{citation|url=http://www.legis.state.tx.us/billlookup/Actions.aspx?LegSess=83R&Bill=HB3322 |title=House Bill 3322 History, 83rd Legislature, Regular Session, 2013 |publisher=Legis.state.tx.us |access-date=December 5, 2013}}{{citation|url=http://www.legis.state.tx.us/billlookup/Actions.aspx?LegSess=83R&Bill=SB1316 |title=Senate Bill 1316 History, 83rd Legislature, Regular Session, 2013 |publisher=Legis.state.tx.us |access-date=December 5, 2013}}

{{Main|Same-sex marriage in Texas}}

On June 26, 2015, U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Obergefell v. Hodges legalized same-sex marriage nationwide.{{cite news|last1=Liptak|first1=Adam|title=Same-Sex Marriage Is a Right, Supreme Court Rules, 5-4|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/27/us/supreme-court-same-sex-marriage.html|website=New York Times|date=June 26, 2015|access-date=26 June 2015}} By September of that year, the Texas Department of State Health Services estimated it had issued 2,500 same-sex marriage licenses in the months following Obergefell.{{cite news |last=Hasan |first=Syeda |date=September 14, 2015 |title=Texas Estimates 2,500 Same-Sex Marriage Licenses Issued Statewide |url=https://www.houstonpublicmedia.org/articles/news/2015/09/14/122834/texas-estimates-2500-same-sex-marriage-licenses-issued-statewide/ |work= houstonpublicmedia.org |publisher= Houston Public Media |access-date=February 9, 2025}}

The first legal challenge to Texas' ban on marriage between two people of the same sex came in 1972 when Travis Co Attorney Ned Granger requested an opinion from Attorney General Crawford Martin on the legality of issuing such licenses. Martin issued an opinion that, despite the lack of a specific prohibition against same-sex marriage in statute, it was not legally permitted.{{cite web|url=https://www.scribd.com/doc/248960006/Crawford-Martin-Opinion-1216|title=Crawford Martin Opinion 1216|website=Scribd|access-date=13 August 2015}} In 1973, the Texas Family Code was amended by House Bill 103 to explicitly state that a marriage license may only be issued to a man and a woman. HB 103 became effective on January 1, 1974.Acts of the Texas Legislature 1973, 63rd Leg. p. 1596, ch 577

In 1997, Texas banned the issuance of marriage licenses to same-sex couples. Additional legislation in 2003 forbade the recognition of any same-sex marriages or civil unions. In 2005, voters approved a referendum that added those restrictions to the Constitution of Texas.

On February 26, 2014, Judge Orlando Luis Garcia, of the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas, found that Texas's ban on same-sex marriage was unconstitutional.{{cite news|last=Brubaker Calkins|first=Laurel|title=Texas Gay-Marriage Ban Held Illegal as Judge Delays Order |url=https://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-02-26/texas-same-sex-marriage-ban-unconstitutional-federal-judge-says.html |access-date=9 March 2014|newspaper=Bloomberg News|date=27 February 2014}} On April 23, 2014, Judge Barbara Nellermoe, of the 45th Judicial District Court of Bexar County, found that Texas's ban on same-sex marriage was unconstitutional.{{cite news|title=Judge: Texas can't bar gay marriage — or divorce|url=http://www.expressnews.com/news/local/article/Judge-Texas-can-t-bar-gay-marriage-or-divorce-5425778.php?t=ac46f8d19dabfb0f9d|access-date=May 16, 2014}} Both cases were appealed by Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott.{{cite news|last=Snow|first=Justin|title=Federal court finds Texas ban on same-sex marriage unconstitutional|url=http://www.metroweekly.com/poliglot/2014/02/federal-court-finds-texas-ban-on-same-sex-marriage.html|access-date=February 26, 2014|newspaper=Metro Weekly|date=February 26, 2014|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://archive.today/20140226210252/http://www.metroweekly.com/poliglot/2014/02/federal-court-finds-texas-ban-on-same-sex-marriage.html|archive-date=February 26, 2014|df=mdy-all}}{{cite news|url=http://www.foxsanantonio.com/news/features/top-stories/stories/state-attorney-general-challanges-bexar-county-samesex-divorce-3281.shtml#.U3XwoihiYtB |title=State Attorney General Challanges Bexar County Same-Sex Divorce |access-date=2014-06-29 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140517122017/http://www.foxsanantonio.com/news/features/top-stories/stories/state-attorney-general-challanges-bexar-county-samesex-divorce-3281.shtml |archive-date=May 17, 2014 }}

In February 2015, two state judges in Travis County held the state's ban on same-sex marriage unconstitutional. One ordered the recognition of a common-law marriage between two women and the other order the county clerk to issue a marriage license to two women. They obtained their license and wed before Attorney General Ken Paxton obtained stays from the Texas Supreme Court and asked that court to void the marriage license.{{cite news|work=The Daily Texan|title=Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton calls on state Supreme Court to block Travis County gay marriage ruling|first=Julia|last=Brouillette|url=http://www.dailytexanonline.com/2015/02/19/travis-county-judge-rules-same-sex-marriage-bans-unconstitutional|access-date=February 20, 2015|date=February 19, 2015|archive-date=February 20, 2015|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150220041521/http://www.dailytexanonline.com/2015/02/19/travis-county-judge-rules-same-sex-marriage-bans-unconstitutional|url-status=dead}}

{{Main|Recognition of same-sex unions in Texas}}

File:Texas counties and cities with domestic partnerships.svg either county-wide or in particular cities.

{{legend|#28db24|City offers domestic partner benefits}}

{{legend|#dfffa5|County-wide partner benefits through domestic partnership}}

{{legend|#d0d0d0|County or city does not offer domestic partner benefits}}]]

Same sex-marriages have been recognized throughout the state since 2015. Currently, there is no recognition of domestic partnerships at the statewide level in Texas for either same-sex or opposite-sex couples.

Austin,{{citation |access-date=December 5, 2013 |url=http://www.austintexas.gov/sites/default/files/files/Employment/DomesticPartnerAffidavitAgreement.pdf |title=Domestic Partnership Affidavit and Agreement |author=((City of Austin Texas))}} Dallas,{{citation |url=http://dallascityhall.com/pdf/HR/DomesticPartner.pdf |title=AFFIDAVIT OF DOMESTIC PARTNERSHIP |publisher=City of Dallas |date=August 2004 |access-date=November 25, 2012 |url-status=dead |archive-date=September 17, 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110917053637/http://dallascityhall.com/pdf/HR/DomesticPartner.pdf |df=mdy-all}} Fort Worth,{{citation|url=http://fortworthtexas.gov/hr/benefits |title=Employee Benefits, Human Resources, City of Fort Worth |publisher=Fortworthtexas.gov |access-date=December 5, 2013 |archive-date=June 27, 2013 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130627100330/http://fortworthtexas.gov/hr/benefits/ |df=mdy-all }} El Paso,{{Cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/02/us/in-el-paso-a-storm-over-benefits-for-gay-partners.html|title=In El Paso, a Storm Over Benefits for Gay Partners|first=Brandi|last=Grissom|newspaper=The New York Times|date=October 1, 2011}} Houston,{{citation|url=http://www.kens5.com/news/Mayor-Parker-Benefits-will-be-offered-to-same-sex-spouses-of-city-employees-232742831.html|title=Houston Mayor: Benefits will be offered to same-sex spouses of city employees|publisher=kens5.com|access-date=November 23, 2012|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131203002801/http://www.kens5.com/news/Mayor-Parker-Benefits-will-be-offered-to-same-sex-spouses-of-city-employees-232742831.html|archive-date=December 3, 2013|df=mdy-all}} and San Antonio{{citation|url=http://www.sanantonio.gov/hr/employee_information/benefits/benefits_civ.asp#Partner |title="What You Need to Know", Civilian Employees, Human Resources Department, City of San Antonio |publisher=Sanantonio.gov |access-date=December 5, 2013}} provide health insurance to domestic partners of city workers. In 2001, 52% of Houston voters approved Proposition 2, an amendment to the city charter prohibiting the city from providing domestic partner benefits for city employees.{{cite news|url=http://www.commondreams.org/news2001/1107-03.htm |title=Major Ballot Victories in Michigan and Florida; Loss in Houston|work=Common Dreams|publisher=Commondreams.org |date=November 7, 2001 |access-date=December 5, 2013 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131203012531/http://www.commondreams.org/news2001/1107-03.htm |archive-date=December 3, 2013 }} The amendment, however, specifically permits benefits to be provided to "legal spouses" of employees, and in November 2013, the city's legal department determined it would be unlawful to continue to deny spousal benefits for legally married same-sex couples.{{Cite web|url=https://www.houstonpublicmedia.org/articles/news/2017/08/10/229976/city-employees-sue-houston-to-defend-same-sex-spousal-benefits/|title=City Employees Sue Houston To Defend Same-Sex Spousal Benefits|first=Andrew|last=Schneider|date=August 10, 2017|website=Houston Public Media}}

The Pflugerville Independent School District allows domestic partners of district workers to be included in the district's health insurance plan, although the workers must pay the entire cost of the coverage as they do for any dependent.{{cite news |last=Wolfson |first=Shannon |url=http://www.kxan.com/dpp/news/local/austin/pisd-offers-domestic-partner-benefits |title=PISD offers domestic partner benefits |work=Kxan.com |date=October 8, 2012 |access-date=December 5, 2013 |archive-date=November 14, 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20121114032205/http://www.kxan.com/dpp/news/local/austin/pisd-offers-domestic-partner-benefits |url-status=dead }}{{cite news|url=http://kutnews.org/post/pflugerville-isd-extends-domestic-partner-benefits-employees |title=Pflugerville ISD Extends Domestic Partner Benefits to Employees |work=KUT News |first1=Tyler |last1=Pratt |first2=Laurie |last2=Johnson |date=December 14, 2012 |access-date=2014-06-29}}

Dallas County pays cash subsidies to help cover the cost of individual insurance policies purchased by the domestic partners of county employees. The amount of the subsidy is the same as the amount the county contributes to the group insurance plan that covers county employees, which in October 2012 was $300 per month. The county was unable to add the domestic partners to the group plan because the two other counties participating in the plan, Denton and Tarrant, opposed it.{{cite news|url=http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/31/dallas-county-domestic-partner-insurance-subsidy-gay-couples_n_2050296.html |title=Dallas County Approves Domestic Partner Insurance Subsidy That Includes Same-Sex Couples |work=The Huffington Post |first=Curtis M. |last=Wong |date= October 31, 2012|access-date=December 5, 2013}}{{citation |publisher=Dallas County |url=http://www.dallascounty.org/department/HR/domestic.html |title=Dallas County Domestic Partners Program |author=((Dallas County Human Resources)) |access-date=December 5, 2013}}

Travis County allows the domestic partners of county employees to participate as dependents in the county's group insurance plan.{{citation|url=http://www.co.travis.tx.us/human_resources/pdfs/tcbenefitguide_external.pdf |title=Travis County Employee Benefits Guide FY 13: October 1, 2012 - September 30, 2013 |access-date=December 5, 2013}}

El Paso County provides health benefits to unmarried partners of county employees.{{cite news|last=Flores|first=Aileen B.|date=August 14, 2012|access-date=December 5, 2013|url=http://www.elpasotimes.com/news/ci_21301678/el-paso-county-commissioners-vote-consider-domestic-partner|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120815185950/http://www.elpasotimes.com/news/ci_21301678/el-paso-county-commissioners-vote-consider-domestic-partner|url-status=dead|archive-date=August 15, 2012|title=El Paso County Commissioners Court OKs benefits for employees' partners|work=El Paso Times|publisher=Elpasotimes.com}}

Bexar County allows county employee benefits to be extended to domestic partners.{{cite news |title=Domestic Partner Benefits Approved For Bexar County Employees |url=http://tpr.org/post/domestic-partner-benefits-approved-bexar-county-employees | work=Texas Public Radio TPR |date=February 4, 2014 |access-date=February 4, 2014 }}

{{Main|Recognition of same-sex unions in Texas#2013 Texas attorney general opinion|l1=2013 Texas attorney general opinion}}

In April 2013, Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott, provided his legal opinion that the Texas Constitution prohibits a political subdivision of the state from providing benefits based on a status like "domestic partnership" because it is "similar to marriage".{{citation |url=https://www.oag.state.tx.us/opinions/opinions/50abbott/op/2013/pdf/ga1003.pdf |title=Opinion GA-1003, Texas Attorney General, April 29, 2013 |access-date=December 5, 2013 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130616051646/https://www.oag.state.tx.us/opinions/opinions/50abbott/op/2013/pdf/ga1003.pdf |archive-date=June 16, 2013 |url-status=dead }} In response, officials in Travis County and Fort Worth defended the legality of their domestic partnership benefits,{{cite news |last=Llorca |first=Juan Carlos |url=http://www.kxan.com/dpp/news/texas/texas-ags-same-sex-opinion-doesnt-worry-entities |title=Attorney General's same-sex opinion doesn't worry entities |publisher=Kxan.com |date=May 3, 2013 |access-date=January 17, 2014 |archive-date=May 8, 2013 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130508032029/http://www.kxan.com/dpp/news/texas/texas-ags-same-sex-opinion-doesnt-worry-entities |url-status=dead }} as did those in other jurisdictions who minimized the significance of the opinion.{{cite news |first1=Whitney |last1=Burbank |first2=Leonard |last2=Martinez |url=http://www.kvia.com/news/texas-attorney-general-samesex-marriage-benefits-unconstitutional/-/391068/19943066/-/1365g0o/-/index.html |title=Texas AG: Domestic partner benefits unconstitutional, Bishop Tom Brown threatens city with lawsuit |publisher=Kvia.com |date=April 30, 2013 |access-date=January 17, 2014 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131202231923/http://www.kvia.com/news/texas-attorney-general-samesex-marriage-benefits-unconstitutional/-/391068/19943066/-/1365g0o/-/index.html |archive-date=December 2, 2013 |url-status=dead }}{{cite news |last=Ramirez |first=Cindy |url=http://www.elpasotimes.com/news/ci_23548512/justices-strike-down-defense-marriage-act-el-paso |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130630000407/http://www.elpasotimes.com/news/ci_23548512/justices-strike-down-defense-marriage-act-el-paso |url-status=dead |archive-date=June 30, 2013 |title=Justices strike down DOMA: El Paso gay groups, officials cheer shift toward equality |publisher=El Paso Times |date=June 27, 2013 |access-date=January 17, 2014 }} The Austin Independent School District decided in June 2013 not to offer health benefits to the domestic partners of its employees,{{cite news |url=http://www.statesman.com/news/news/local-education/aisd-will-not-offer-health-benefits-to-domestic-pa/nYYP2 |title=AISD will not offer health benefits to domestic partners |first=Melissa B. |last=Taboada |date=June 28, 2013 |work=Statesman.com |access-date=January 17, 2014 |archive-date=December 3, 2013 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131203200312/http://www.statesman.com/news/news/local-education/aisd-will-not-offer-health-benefits-to-domestic-pa/nYYP2/ |url-status=dead }} but changed its position in August 2013.{{cite news|title=AG Greg Abbott: City & ISD Domestic Partner Benefits Unconstitutional|url=http://tpr.org/post/ag-greg-abbott-city-isd-domestic-partner-benefits-unconstitutional-update|access-date=January 17, 2014|newspaper=Texas Public Radio|date=April 30, 2013}}

In Texas, any adult may adopt a child without regard to the adult's sexual orientation or gender identity.{{citation|url=http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/FA/htm/FA.162.htm |title=Texas Family Code sec. 162.001 |publisher=Statutes.legis.state.tx.us |access-date=December 5, 2013}} According to the advocacy organizations, the Family Equality Council and Equality Texas{{cite book |last1=Smith |first1=Chuck |last2=Brogan-Kator |first2=Denise |title=Texas LGBTQ Family Law: A Resource Guide for LGBTQ-Headed Families in the Lone Star State |date=November 2016 |publisher=Equality Texas; Family Equality Council |url=https://www.familyequality.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Texas-LGBTQ-Family-Law-Guide-Web.pdf |access-date=4 June 2022}}{{rp|9}} and the non-profit legal services provider Texas Legal Services Center, same-sex couples are able to adopt as a couple if they are legally married. Supplemental birth certificates are issued or amended with the names of the same-sex couple shown as parents. However, adoption agencies, even those with federal funding, are permitted to discriminate against prospective adoptive parents in accord with the religious beliefs of the agency.{{cite web |author1=((Texas Legal Services Center)) |author1-link=Texas Legal Services Center |title=Same-Sex Parentage |url=https://texaslawhelp.org/article/same-sex-parentage |website=texaslawhelp.org |publisher=Texas Law Help |access-date=4 June 2022 |language=en |date=November 11, 2021 |quote=Previously, same-sex couples could legally adopt in Texas—but were required to adopt as two single people jointly adopting the same child, not as a couple...Under the new guidelines, all married couples will be treated the same and same-sex couples will be allowed to adopt as a couple, provided they are legally married." [...] "For any adoption ordered on or after June 26, 2015, supplementary birth certificates for children born in Texas will be issued/amended for the adopted child to include same-sex couples whose names are listed on the court order or formal certificate of adoption as the adoptive parents.}} Lesbian couples can access in vitro fertilization and assisted insemination treatment. However, the state's requirement for health plans to cover IVF includes severe restrictions, "The fertilization or attempted fertilization of the patient's oocytes is made only with the sperm of the patient's spouse," that reduce their access to assisted reproduction.{{citation|url=http://txfertility.com/fertility-treatments/lgbt-family-building/|title=Texas Fertility Center Specializes in Family Building Options for Lesbian Couples|work=Texas Fertility Center|access-date=2017-11-11}}{{Cite web|date=December 13, 2016|title=Seven Anti-LGBT Laws That Remain on Texas' Books|url=https://www.texasobserver.org/seven-anti-lgbt-laws-that-remain-on-texas-books/|access-date=July 23, 2021|newspaper=The Texas Observer|language=en-US}}

Texas statutes have never prohibited same-sex second-parent adoptions or adoption by a same-sex couple and state courts occasionally approved such adoptions, pre-Obergefell v. Hodges. However, such couples were at that time required to adopt as two single people jointly adopting the same child. The Texas Courts of Appeals concluded in 2009 that a lower court's approval of an adoption by a same-sex couple did not represent a "fundamental error".{{citation|title=Texas Adoption Law|url=http://www.hrc.org/laws-and-legislation/entry/texas-adoption-law|work=State Laws & Legislation|publisher=Human Rights Campaign|access-date=January 15, 2014|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140116123554/http://www.hrc.org/laws-and-legislation/entry/texas-adoption-law|archivedate=16 January 2014|id=Updated: December 14, 2009 }} On November 15, 2012, Representative Rafael Anchia introduced House Bill 201 to the Legislature's 2013 regular session.{{cite news |url=http://www.dallasvoice.com/anchia-files-bill-gay-parents-names-certificates-10132117.html |title=Rep. Anchia files that gay adoption bill that Sen. Carona said he would support |author=John Wright |date=November 15, 2012 |work=Dallas Voice |access-date=November 19, 2012 |archive-date=November 27, 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20121127153118/http://www.dallasvoice.com/anchia-files-bill-gay-parents-names-certificates-10132117.html |url-status=dead }} The bill would have deleted the prohibition against issuing a supplemental birth certificate for a child adopted by two men or two women.{{citation|url=http://www.legis.state.tx.us/tlodocs/83R/billtext/pdf/HB00201I.pdf#navpanes=0 |title=House Bill 201 - Introduced Text, 83rd Legislature, Regular Session, 2013 |access-date=December 5, 2013}} The bill died in the Judiciary and Civil Jurisprudence committee of the House of Representatives.{{citation|url=http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/BillLookup/History.aspx?LegSess=83R&Bill=HB201 |title=House Bill 201 History, 83rd Legislature, Regular Session, 2013 |publisher=Capitol.state.tx.us |access-date=December 5, 2013}}

Following the Obergefell v. Hodges ruling that compels recognition of same-sex marriage in all states, legally married couples, whether of the same- or opposite-sex, are equally eligible to be considered as adoptive parents, and the prohibition on issuance of supplementary birth certificates listing two men or two women as parents ceased on June 26, 2015.

{{further|Politics of Texas}}

The Texas Republican Party holds all statewide offices in Texas, controls both houses of the Texas Legislature as well as the Governor of Texas (known as the government trifecta).{{Cite web|website=Texas GOP|url=http://www.texasgop.org/inner.asp?z=3|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101130150034/http://www.texasgop.org/inner.asp?z=3|url-status=dead|title=History of the Republican Party of Texas Republic Party of Texas|access-date=January 19, 2011|archive-date=November 30, 2010}}

Republican Governor Rick Perry signed a pledge from the National Organization for Marriage to oppose same-sex marriage;{{cite news |url=http://www.catholic.org/politics/story.php?id=42604 |title=Presidential Candidate Rick Perry Signs Pledge Opposing Same-Sex Marriage |first=Matt|last= Cover |work=Catholic.org |date=August 30, 2011 |access-date=December 5, 2013}} Perry also dismissed the Lawrence v. Texas U. S. Supreme Court decision as the product of "nine oligarchs in robes".{{cite news|first=Tim |last=Murphy |url=https://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2011/04/map-has-your-state-banned-sodomy |title=MAP: Has Your State Banned Sodomy? |work=Mother Jones |date= April 19, 2011|access-date=December 5, 2013}}

The Texas Democratic Party added certain LGBT rights to the party's platform in 1980,{{citation | url=http://connection.ebscohost.com/c/articles/10189164/texas-democrats-ok-gay-rights-plank | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130705032403/http://connection.ebscohost.com/c/articles/10189164/texas-democrats-ok-gay-rights-plank |archive-date=July 5, 2013 |title=Texas Democrats OK Gay Rights Plank |date=November 13, 1980 |access-date=January 21, 2013}} and included same-sex marriage rights in its 2012 platform,{{cite news |last=Guo |first=Angela | url=http://thinkprogress.org/lgbt/2012/06/11/497250/democratic-state-marriage-equality |title=Three State Democratic Parties Add Marriage Equality To Their 2012 Platform |work=Think Progress |date=June 11, 2012 | access-date=January 21, 2013}} becoming the first Democratic state party in the southern United States to do so.{{cite news |last=Lindell |first=Chuck |title=Platform vote on same-sex marriage at Democratic convention called historic |url=http://www.statesman.com/news/news/state-regional/platform-vote-on-same-sex-marriage-at-democratic-c/nR7rw |access-date=January 22, 2013 |newspaper=Austin American-Statesman |date=September 3, 2012 |archive-date=April 7, 2015 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150407050855/http://www.statesman.com/news/news/state-regional/platform-vote-on-same-sex-marriage-at-democratic-c/nR7rw/ |url-status=dead }}

According to the Texas Tribune, around fifty bills "targeting LGBTQ people" had been filed by Texas lawmakers by early January 2023 for the new legislative session.{{cite news |last1=Nguyen |first1=Alex |title='I want to fight': LGBTQ Texans ready for legislative session as GOP lawmakers target them in dozens of bills |url=https://www.texastribune.org/2023/01/09/transgender-laws-gender-care-texas-legislature/ |access-date=27 January 2023 |work=The Texas Tribune |date=9 January 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230126053324/https://www.texastribune.org/2023/01/09/transgender-laws-gender-care-texas-legislature/ |archive-date=26 January 2023 |language=en}} The range of bills filed cover several aspects that may affect LGBT rights. These include measures: criminalizing provision of gender-affirming health care to minors; reducing access to gender-affirming treatments for individuals of any age; restricting public performances that include performers deemed to be displaying markers or behavior considered appropriate for a sex other than the one assigned to them at birth; disallowing any alteration of sex (gender) marker on official documents for minors; and further restricting participation in sports for transsexual or gender non-conforming people.{{cite news |last1=Alfonseca |first1=Kiara |title=Transgender health care, community targeted in new slate of Texas bills |url=https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/transgender-health-care-community-targeted-slate-texas-bills/story?id=93347307 |access-date=January 27, 2023 |work=ABC News |date=November 17, 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230126053319/https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/transgender-health-care-community-targeted-slate-texas-bills/story?id=93347307 |archive-date=January 26, 2023 |language=en}}{{cite magazine |last1=Caraballo |first1=Alejandra |title=The Texas Legislature Is Preparing an All-Out War on Trans People's Existence |url=https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2022/11/texas-transgender-ban-drag-shows-criminalize-parents.html |magazine=Slate Magazine |date=21 November 2022 |language=en}}{{cite news |last1=Barragán |first1=James |last2=Svitek |first2=Patrick |title=The Texas Legislative session has begun. Here are 6 things we're watching. |url=https://www.texastribune.org/2023/01/10/texas-legislature-2023/ |work=The Texas Tribune |date=10 January 2023 |language=en}}

{{See also|#Gender-affirming healthcare for minors}}

The signing of Senate bill 14 (SB 14) in June 2023, effectively banning gender-affirming care for minors, follows a number of earlier and ongoing attempts to pass laws with similar effects.{{cite news |last1=Melhado |first1=William |last2=Nguyen |first2=Alex |title=Texas lawmakers pursued dozens of bills affecting LGBTQ people this year. Here's what passed and what failed. |url=https://www.texastribune.org/2023/03/06/texas-legislature-lgbtq-bills/ |access-date=25 June 2023 |work=The Texas Tribune |date=6 March 2023 |language=en}} For example:

• In May 2021, although an effort to ban gender-affirming healthcare for minors (House Bill 1399) missed its legislative deadline in the House,{{Cite news|last=Munce|first=Megan|date=2021-05-14|title=Time runs out on Texas House bill banning gender-confirmation health care for kids, but another attempt lives on in the Senate|url=https://www.texastribune.org/2021/05/14/texas-transgender-health-care-children-legislature/|access-date=2021-05-19|work=The Texas Tribune|language=en}} a similar bill (Senate Bill 1311) was passed by the Senate in an 18–13 vote. The bill would revoke the medical license of any doctor who provides gender-affirming healthcare, including puberty blockers, to minors.{{Cite news|last=Munce|first=Megan|date=2021-05-17|title=Texas Senate resumes push to ban transition-related medical care for transgender children, days after bill failed in House |url=https://www.texastribune.org/2021/05/17/texas-transgender-children-medical-care/|access-date=2021-05-19 |work=The Texas Tribune|language=en}}
• In February 2022, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton issued a legal opinion that gender affirming care for transgender youth was child abuse under state law.{{Cite news |title=Texas AG says transition care for minors is child abuse under state law |url=https://www.nbcnews.com/nbc-out/out-politics-and-policy/texas-ag-says-transition-care-minors-child-abuse-state-law-rcna17176 |access-date=2022-03-12 |work=NBC News |language=en}} After this, Texas Governor Greg Abbott told medical professionals and members of the public to report any transgender youth who received such care and called on the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services to investigate parents for child abuse if they helped their kids receive such care, with "criminal penalties" for those who knowingly fail to report.{{Cite web |url=https://www.nbcnews.com/nbc-out/out-politics-and-policy/texas-governor-calls-citizens-report-parents-transgender-kids-abuse-rcna17455 |title=Texas governor calls on citizens to report parents of transgender kids for abuse |last1=Yurcaba |first1=Jo|website=NBC News |date=February 23, 2022 }} Five district attorneys said they would not follow the order.{{Cite web |title=5 Texas DAs defy Gov. Greg Abbott, won't treat gender affirming care for trans youth as 'child abuse' |url=https://money.yahoo.com/5-texas-das-defy-gov-182911015.html |access-date=2022-03-05 |website=money.yahoo.com |date=February 28, 2022 |language=en-US}}{{Cite web |title=In response to Governor Abbott and AG Paxton's directives regarding transgender youth care |url=https://twitter.com/dallas_da/status/1496896055828434948 |access-date=2022-03-05 |website=Twitter |language=en}} The ACLU and Lambda Legal sued over the order,{{Cite news |last=Romo |first=Vanessa |date=2022-03-01 |title=The ACLU sues to block Texas from investigating parents of trans youth |language=en |work=NPR |url=https://www.npr.org/2022/03/01/1083822027/aclu-lawsuit-texas-parents-trans-transgender-minor-abbott |access-date=2022-03-05}} and many medical groups condemned it.{{Cite web |title=ICYMI: Houston Chronicle & National Medical, Education and Mental Health Organizations Condemn Anti-transgender Measures in Texas and Across Country |url=https://www.hrc.org/press-releases/icymi-houston-chronicle-national-medical-education-and-mental-health-organizations-condemn-anti-transgender-measures-in-texas-and-across-country |access-date=2022-03-05 |website=Human Rights Campaign |date=March 4, 2022 |language=en-US}} In March 2022, the Texas Third Court of Appeals reinstated a temporary injunction barring enforcement of Abbott's directive.{{cite news |last1=Caspani |first1=Maria |title=United States Texas court reinstates injunction blocking probes of transgender kids' parents |url=https://www.reuters.com/world/us/texas-court-reinstates-injunction-blocking-investigations-transgender-kids-2022-03-22/ |website=Reuters |date=March 22, 2022 |agency=Reuters |access-date=9 May 2022}} The ACLU sued on behalf of a family being investigated.{{Cite web |title=Doe v. Abbott |url=https://www.aclu.org/cases/doe-v-abbott |access-date=2022-03-12 |website=American Civil Liberties Union |language=en}}

Randy Mulanax, investigative supervisor with the Texas DFPS, testified in court that cases regarding trans children were being subject to different rules than other cases, with investigation of any child reported, regardless of evidence, being mandatory, and investigators being prohibited from discussing the case over email or text.{{Cite web |url= https://www.texastribune.org/2022/03/11/transgender-texas-court-hearing/ |title= Judge temporarily blocks Texas investigations into families of trans kids |last1=Klibanoff |first1=Eleanor |last2=Dey |first2=Sneha|date= March 11, 2022 }}{{Cite news |title=Texas governor calls on citizens to report parents of transgender kids for abuse |url=https://www.nbcnews.com/nbc-out/out-politics-and-policy/texas-governor-calls-citizens-report-parents-transgender-kids-abuse-rcna17455 |access-date=2022-03-12 |work=NBC News |language=en}}

In July 2022, the state of Texas hired Dr. James Cantor as an expert witness in defense of a directive from Texas Governor Greg Abbott barring minors from receiving gender-affirming care.{{Cite web |url=https://www.houstonchronicle.com/politics/texas/article/Texas-judge-blocks-two-CPS-investigations-of-17293783.php |title=Texas judge blocks two CPS investigations of transgender health care for kids |website=Houston Chronicle |last1=Goldenstein |first1=Taylor |date=8 July 2022 |access-date=13 October 2022}} The suit was supported by LGBT advocacy group PFLAG.{{Cite web |url=https://www.houstonchronicle.com/politics/texas/article/New-suit-Texas-transgender-care-17228748.php |title=Families sue to halt Texas investigations of medical care for transgender children |website=Houston Chronicle |last1=Goldenstein |first1=Taylor |date=8 June 2022 |access-date=19 October 2022}} According to an article in the Houston Chronicle, Cantor said that for minors experiencing gender dysphoria, the condition may desist and they may become cisgender gay or lesbian people. The attorneys for the plaintiffs objected saying that the studies referred to "tomboys" and "effeminate" youth. They further argued that Cantor lacked practical experience treating minors with gender dysphoria, and most of the studies he cited were published before 1988.

Also in July 2022, Yale University released a point by point rebuttal of the justifications given by Texas and Alabama for their bans on youth gender affirming care, stating that puberty blockers and hormone therapies are in fact safe and effective for treating gender dysphoria, that "these are not close calls or areas of reasonable disagreement", and that both states "ignore established medical authorities and repeat discredited, outdated, and poor-quality information" and repeatedly cite "a fringe group whose listed advisors have limited (or no) scientific and medical credentials and include well known anti-trans activists".{{Cite web |title=New Report Refutes Flawed Science of Texas and Alabama Transgender Legal Actions |url=https://law.yale.edu/yls-today/news/new-report-refutes-flawed-science-texas-and-alabama-transgender-legal-actions |website=law.yale.edu|date=May 2, 2022 }}

• In April 2023, an extensive bill (SB 1029) passed the Texas Senate by a vote of 18–12. The bill would hold physicians and health insurers financially liable for any complications of gender-affirming care over the patient's life, including for reversing said care. It would also forbid publicly funded health plans from covering gender-affirming treatment.{{cite web |url=https://www.texastribune.org/2023/04/25/transgender-health-care-legislature/ |title=Transgender Texans of all ages could lose access to transition-related care under Senate bill |last=Nguyen |first=Alex |date=April 25, 2023 |website=The Texas Tribune |access-date=January 30, 2024}} The bill was referred to the legislature's State Affairs Committee and has yet to be voted on in the House of Representatives.{{cite press release |author1=((HRC Staff)) |title=Texas Senate Passes Sweeping Ban to Prohibit Trans Youth and Adults from Receiving Necessary Medical Care |url=https://www.hrc.org/press-releases/texas-senate-passes-sweeping-ban-to-prohibit-trans-youth-and-adults-from-receiving-necessary-medical-care |publisher=Human Rights Campaign |access-date=26 June 2023 |date=April 26, 2023}}

In October 2020, a new "internal policy" and regulation within Texas permitted discrimination by social workers against LGBT individuals and individuals with a disability who are clients.{{Cite web|url=https://www.kxan.com/news/texas/texas-regulatory-board-votes-to-allow-social-workers-to-decline-clients-who-are-lgbtq-or-have-a-disability/|title = Texas regulatory board votes to allow social workers to decline clients who are LGBTQ+ or have a disability|date = October 15, 2020}}{{Cite web|url=https://www.them.us/story/texas-allows-lgbtq-discrimination-social-work|title = Texas Reverses Policy Allowing Social Workers to Turn Away LGBTQ+ Clients|date = October 15, 2020}}{{Cite web|url=https://www.sbs.com.au/news/social-workers-in-texas-can-turn-away-clients-with-disabilities-after-cowardly-decision|title = Social workers in Texas can turn away clients with disabilities after 'cowardly' decision}}{{Cite web|url=https://www.washingtonblade.com/2020/10/20/texas-assailed-for-allowing-social-workers-to-turn-away-lgbtq-disabled-patients/|title=Texas assailed for allowing social workers to turn away LGBTQ, disabled patients|date=October 20, 2020}}

On February 23, 2022, Texas Governor Greg Abbott signed an order to direct the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services to investigate providing gender-affirming healthcare to transgender people under 18 as child abuse.{{cite news |last1=Ghorayshi |first1=Azeen |title=Texas Governor Pushes to Investigate Medical Treatments for Trans Youth as 'Child Abuse' |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/23/science/texas-abbott-transgender-child-abuse.html |access-date=2 March 2022 |work=The New York Times |date=23 February 2022}} He also encouraged licensed professionals who work with children and the general public to report the parents of transgender youth.{{cite news |last1=Yurcaba |first1=Jo |title=Texas governor calls on citizens to report parents of transgender kids for abuse |url=https://www.nbcnews.com/nbc-out/out-politics-and-policy/texas-governor-calls-citizens-report-parents-transgender-kids-abuse-rcna17455 |access-date=2 March 2022 |publisher=NBC News |date=23 February 2022}} On March 1, 2022, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), the ACLU of Texas and Lambda Legal filed a lawsuit to block the directive on the behalf of Dr. Megan Mooney, a clinical psychologist, and an anonymous family containing two supportive parents and a 16-year-old transgender girl who was being treated with puberty blockers to prevent gender dysphoria.{{cite news |last1=Lemos |first1=Gregory |last2=Rose |first2=Andy |last3=Razek |first3=Raja |title=Texas begins investigating parents of transgender teens for child abuse, according to a lawsuit. One parent works in the department involved in the investigations |url=https://www.cnn.com/2022/03/01/us/texas-transgender-family-investigation-lawsuit/index.html |access-date=2 March 2022 |publisher=CNN |date=1 March 2022}}{{cite news |last1=Goodman |first1=J. David |last2=Morris |first2=Amanda |title=Texas Investigates Parents Over Care for Transgender Youth, Suit Says |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/01/us/texas-child-abuse-trans-youth.html |access-date=2 March 2022 |work=The New York Times |date=1 March 2022}}

In February 2022, the Texas Department of Health and Human Services removed a listing for The Trevor Project, a national organization for LGBT youth, from its online suicide prevention resources.{{Cite news |last=Yurcaba |first=Jo |date=2 March 2022 |title=Texas continues to remove LGBTQ suicide prevention resources from state websites |work=NBC News |url=https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/texas-continues-remove-lgbtq-suicide-prevention-resources-state-websit-rcna18376 |access-date=8 March 2022}}

A bill which, if passed, will widen the definition of "sexually oriented businesses" (SOBs) was prefiled in the Texas legislature in November 2022.{{cite news |last1=Schermele |first1=Zachary |title=Texas GOP looks to restrict transgender health care and drag shows |url=https://www.nbcnews.com/nbc-out/out-politics-and-policy/texas-gop-looks-restrict-transgender-health-care-drag-shows-rcna57346 |access-date=19 December 2022 |work=NBC News |date=16 November 2022 |language=en}} The intent of HB 643, according to the filing member Rep. Jared Patterson, is to criminalize allowing minors to attend drag shows, but the new, broader definitions of "sexually oriented businesses" contained in the bill will capture a range of public performances other than "drag shows".{{cite news |last1=Murney |first1=Michael |title=Texas bill proposes criminal charges for minor-friendly drag show venues |url=https://www.chron.com/politics/article/texas-drag-show-law-17589237.php |access-date=19 December 2022 |work=Chron |date=16 November 2022 |publisher=Hearst Newspapers}} They will also restrict access to any entertainment where, either, transgender persons perform in any role, or cisgender persons depict characters of diverse or ambiguous genders, such as occurs in many traditional theatrical productions. This is because the bill covers any performance where a performer uses "clothing, makeup, or other physical markers" to "exhibit a gender" at variance from the one assigned to them at birth and also "sings, lip syncs, dances, or otherwise performs" in front of an audience.{{cite magazine |last1=Riedel |first1=Samantha |title=A New Texas Bill Wants to Classify Drag as a "Sexually Oriented Business" |url=https://www.them.us/story/texas-law-would-classify-drag-as-sexually-oriented-business-ban-minors |access-date=19 December 2022 |magazine=Them |publisher=Condé Nast |date=16 November 2022}} As currently defined, SOBs are businesses where anyone performs nude, as in, for example, "strip shows".{{Cite act |type=House bill |index=643 |title=An Act relating to the definition of sexually oriented business. |date=November 14, 2022 |url=https://legiscan.com/TX/text/HB643/2023 |page=1}}{{Cite act |type=Statute |title=Business and Commerce Code, Chapter 102: Sexually oriented businesses |legislature=Texas Legislature |date=2009 |url=https://statutes.capitol.texas.gov/Docs/BC/htm/BC.102.htm |via=statutes.capitol.texas.gov}}

{{main|Bostock v. Clayton County}}

{{see also|Civil Rights Act of 1964#Title VII—equal employment opportunity}}

In March 2021, Texas courts have fully recognised that LGBT individuals have employment protections, based on the 2020 Bostock v. Clayton County Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) legal precedent.{{Cite news|date=March 23, 2021 |url=https://www.hppr.org/post/first-time-texas-court-decides-state-law-protects-lgbtq-employees|title=For the First Time, A Texas Court Decides State Law Protects LGBTQ Employees|work=HPPR.com}} In 2022, Texas became a plaintiff in a federal lawsuit to overturn some LGBT protections on Constitutional grounds.{{cite news |work=Texas Tribune |url=https://www.texastribune.org/2022/10/06/texas-lawsuit-lgbt-workers/ |title=Federal judge curtails protections for LGBTQ workers, trans kids in response to Texas lawsuit |date=October 6, 2022 }}

{{As of|2021}}, no Texas state law protects employees from discrimination based on their sexual orientation or gender identity.{{citation |url=http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/LA/htm/LA.21.htm#21.051 |title=Texas Labor Code sec. 21.051 |publisher=Statutes.legis.state.tx.us |access-date=December 5, 2013}} Since at least 1999, no bill prohibiting discrimination by employers based on sexual orientation or gender identity has made it out of the committee stage in the Texas Legislature.{{cite news |work=The Texas Independent |author1=Patrick Brendel |url=http://www.americanindependent.com/165605/bill-would-stop-texas-employers-discrimination-based-on-sexual-orientation-gender-identity |title=Bill would stop Texas employers' discrimination based on sexual orientation, gender identity |date=January 14, 2011 |publisher=Americanindependent.com |access-date=December 5, 2013 |archive-date=March 14, 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120314184541/http://www.americanindependent.com/165605/bill-would-stop-texas-employers-discrimination-based-on-sexual-orientation-gender-identity |url-status=dead }} During the Legislature's 2013 regular session, House Bill 238{{citation|url=http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/tlodocs/83R/billtext/pdf/HB00238I.pdf#navpanes=0 |title=House Bill 238 - Introduced Text, 83rd Legislature, Regular Session, 2013 |access-date=December 5, 2013}} introduced by Representative Mike Villarreal, House Bill 1146{{citation|url=http://www.legis.state.tx.us/tlodocs/83R/billtext/pdf/HB01146I.pdf#navpanes=0 |title=House Bill 1146 - Introduced Text, 83rd Legislature, Regular Session, 2013 |access-date=December 5, 2013}} introduced by Representative Eric Johnson, and Senate Bill 237{{citation|url=http://www.legis.state.tx.us/tlodocs/83R/billtext/pdf/SB00237I.pdf#navpanes=0 |title=Senate Bill 237 - Introduced Text, 83rd Legislature, Regular Session, 2013 |access-date=December 5, 2013}} introduced by Senator Leticia Van de Putte would have prohibited this kind of discrimination; however, all these bills died in their respective committees.{{citation|url=http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/BillLookup/History.aspx?LegSess=83R&Bill=HB238 |title=House Bill 238 History, 83rd Legislature, Regular Session, 2013 |publisher=Capitol.state.tx.us |date=April 24, 2013 |access-date=December 5, 2013}}{{citation|url=http://www.legis.state.tx.us/billlookup/Actions.aspx?LegSess=83R&Bill=HB1146 |title=House Bill 1146 History, 83rd Legislature, Regular Session, 2013 |publisher=Legis.state.tx.us |access-date=December 5, 2013}}{{citation|url=http://www.legis.state.tx.us/billlookup/Actions.aspx?LegSess=83R&Bill=SB237 |title=Senate Bill 237 History, 83rd Legislature, Regular Session, 2013 |publisher=Legis.state.tx.us |access-date=December 5, 2013}} Judge Lee Rosenthal of the Southern District Court of Texas has ruled that sexual orientation and gender identity fall under Federal Protections.{{Cite news|url=https://www.dallasvoice.com/texas-judge-rules-lgbt-workers-federal-protection-discrimination-10251585.html|title=Texas judge rules LGBT workers have federal protection from discrimination - Dallas Voice|date=2018-04-11|work=Dallas Voice|access-date=2018-04-11|language=en-US|archive-date=April 12, 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180412082328/https://www.dallasvoice.com/texas-judge-rules-lgbt-workers-federal-protection-discrimination-10251585.html|url-status=dead}} However, in April 2018, a federal judge of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas ruled that, although a woman hadn't proven she had been discriminated against for being transgender by the company Phillips 66, if that had been proven, then the woman would have "had a case" under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.{{cite news

| author = Lauren McGaughy

| title = LGBT workers are protected from workplace discrimination, Texas judge says in 'earth-shattering' new ruling

| url = https://www.dallasnews.com/news/lgbt/2018/04/10/lgbt-workers-protected-workplace-discrimination-texas-judge-says-earth-shattering-new-ruling

| work = The Dallas Morning News

| date = April 10, 2018

| access-date = April 20, 2018

}} The judge, who had been appointed by President George H. W. Bush in 1992, cited other recent cases as shaping the final decision.

Texas state law doesn't protect people from housing or public accommodations discrimination based on their sexual orientation or gender identity or expression.{{citation|url=http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/PR/htm/PR.301.htm#301.021 |title=Texas Property Code sec. 301.021(a)-(b) |publisher=Statutes.legis.state.tx.us |access-date=December 5, 2013}} House Bill 2215 introduced by Representative Jessica Farrar in the Legislature's 2009 regular session would have prohibited this kind of discrimination;{{citation|url=http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/tlodocs/81R/billtext/pdf/HB02215I.pdf#navpanes=0 |title=House Bill 2215 - Introduced Text, 81st Legislature, Regular Session, 2009 |access-date=December 5, 2013}} however, the bill died in the Judiciary and Civil Jurisprudence committee of the House of Representatives.{{citation|url=http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/BillLookup/History.aspx?LegSess=81R&Bill=HB2215 |title=House Bill 2215 History, 81st Legislature, Regular Session, 2009 |publisher=Capitol.state.tx.us |access-date=December 5, 2013}}

Texas state law also doesn't protect people from insurance discrimination based on their sexual orientation or gender identity or expression. During the Legislature's 2013 regular session, House Bill 206{{citation|url=http://www.legis.state.tx.us/tlodocs/83R/billtext/pdf/HB00226I.pdf#navpanes=0 |title=House Bill 206 - Introduced Text, 83rd Legislature, Regular Session, 2013 |access-date=December 5, 2013}} introduced by Representative Senfronia Thompson, House Bill 541{{citation|url=http://www.legis.state.tx.us/tlodocs/83R/billtext/pdf/HB00541I.pdf#navpanes=0 |title=House Bill 541 - Introduced Text, 83rd Legislature, Regular Session, 2013 |access-date=December 5, 2013}} introduced by Representative Robert Alonzo, and Senate Bill 73{{citation|url=http://www.legis.state.tx.us/tlodocs/83R/billtext/pdf/SB00073I.pdf#navpanes=0 |title=Senate Bill 73 - Introduced Text, 83rd Legislature, Regular Session, 2013 |access-date=December 5, 2013}} introduced by Senator Rodney Ellis would have prohibited this kind of discrimination; however, all these bills died in their respective committees.{{citation|url=http://www.legis.state.tx.us/billlookup/Actions.aspx?LegSess=83R&Bill=HB226 |title=House Bill 226 History, 83rd Legislature, Regular Session, 2013 |publisher=Legis.state.tx.us |access-date=December 5, 2013}}{{citation|url=http://www.legis.state.tx.us/billlookup/Actions.aspx?LegSess=83R&Bill=HB541 |title=House Bill 541 History, 83rd Legislature, Regular Session, 2013 |publisher=Legis.state.tx.us |access-date=December 5, 2013}}{{citation|url=http://www.legis.state.tx.us/billlookup/Actions.aspx?LegSess=83R&Bill=SB73 |title=Senate Bill 73 History, 83rd Legislature, Regular Session, 2013 |publisher=Legis.state.tx.us |date=January 28, 2013 |access-date=December 5, 2013}}

{{broader|State Religious Freedom Restoration Acts#Texas}}

In June 2019, a religious freedom bill, Prohibited Adverse Actions by Government (Protection of Membership in and Support to Religious Organizations), often referred to by media as the "Save Chick-fil-A' bill",{{cite news |last1=Denham |first1=Hannah |title=Texas governor signs 'Save Chick-fil-A' bill into law |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2019/07/19/chick-fil-a-inspires-new-texas-law-focused-protecting-religious-freedom/ |newspaper=Washington Post |date=July 19, 2019}} was passed by the Texas Legislature. The act, SB 1978, prohibits any government, or government agency, from treating adversely anyone who supports any religious organization, which may include organizations that refuse service to members of the LGBTQ community, or those that campaign against equality measures or policy.{{cite act |index=S.B. No. 1978 |date=June 10, 2019 |id=Effective September 1, 2019 |legislature=Legislature of the State of Texas |title= Relating to the protection of membership in, affiliation with, and support provided to religious organizations |type=Amendment to Title 10, Subtitle H, Chapter 2400: Protection of Membership in and Support to Religious Organizations |url=https://capitol.texas.gov/tlodocs/86R/billtext/html/SB01978S.htm |language=en|via=Legiscan}}{{citation|title=Government Entity or Political Subdivision: SB 1978 |work=Texas Judiciary Legislative Update |issue=86 |page=34 |url=https://www.txcourts.gov/media/1444317/86th-legislative-update-v7.pdf |access-date=24 June 2022 |publisher=Texas Judicial Council|quote=...prohibits a governmental entity from taking adverse action (as defined) against a person because of the person's membership in, affiliation with, or contribution, donation, or other support provided to a religious organization.}}

As originally introduced in the senate, the bill had far broader provisions.{{cite news|title=Business Leaders Oppose 'license To Discriminate' Against LGBT Texans|first=Wade|last=Goodwyn|work=NPR|url=https://www.npr.org/2019/05/06/720060927/business-leaders-oppose-license-to-discriminate-against-lgbt-texans|access-date=July 19, 2019|date=6 May 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190719223954/https://www.npr.org/2019/05/06/720060927/business-leaders-oppose-license-to-discriminate-against-lgbt-texans|archive-date=19 July 2019}} For example, Section 2400.002 of the unamended version, filed by Bryan Hughes{{cite act|type=Proposed amendment |index=SB01978I 86(R)12936 YDB-F|date=March 2019 |id=First reading |legislature=Legislature of the State of Texas |title=Proposed amendment to Subtitle H Prohibited Adverse Actions by Government, Title 10, Government Code: An Act relating to the protection of religious beliefs and moral convictions, including beliefs and convictions regarding marriage |language=en |url=https://capitol.texas.gov/tlodocs/86R/billtext/html/SB01978I.HTM}} included direct mention of "beliefs regarding marriage" as protected; the bill as passed was amended to exclude that specification. The final bill also dispensed with language that referred to individuals' "sincerely held" beliefs or convictions; instead, the enacted version enumerates ties to or support of religious organizations.

The enacted bill differed substantively from the original, unpassed version of § 2400.002. An example of the difference between versions is shown below (unenacted version, in italics; enrolled version, as passed, in roman text):

{{Verse translation|

Notwithstanding any other law, a governmental entity may not take any adverse action against any person based wholly or partly on a person's belief or action in accordance with the person's sincerely held religious belief or moral conviction, including beliefs or convictions regarding marriage.

|Notwithstanding any other law, a governmental entity may not take any adverse action against any person based wholly or partly on the person's membership in, affiliation with, or contribution, donation, or other support provided to a religious organization.

|attr1="Introduced version" (not passed) of Senate Bill 1978, § 2400.002|as filed by Bryan Hughes, March 2019

|attr2=Senate Bill No. 1978, § 2400.002 (enrolled version; passed June 10, 2019; enacted, as amended)}} Emma Platoff, writing in the Texas Tribune, considered that the amended bill only restated existing protections{{cite act|legislature=Legislature of the State of Texas|index=76(R) SB 138|title= An act relating to government restrictions on the exercise of religion: Title 5, Civil Practice and Remedies Code, is amended by adding Chapter 110|date=May 24, 1999 |url=https://capitol.texas.gov/tlodocs/76R/billtext/html/SB00138F.htm|id=TX Govt Code § 2400.002 (2021) |via=capitol.texas.gov}} for freedom of religion and association, saying:{{cite news |last1=Platoff |first1=Emma |title=Texas Senate passes religious liberty bill that LGBTQ advocates fear licenses discrimination |url=https://www.texastribune.org/2019/05/15/texas-senate-passes-religious-liberty-bill-lgbtq/ |access-date=10 March 2022 |work=The Texas Tribune |date=16 May 2019 |language=en}} {{blockquote|The original version of Hughes' proposal prevented government retaliation against an individual based on that "person's belief or action in accordance with the person's sincerely held religious belief or moral conviction, including beliefs or convictions regarding marriage" — language advocates feared would embolden businesses to discriminate against gay Texans. The revision, ...outlaws government retaliation against someone based on his or her association with or support of a religious organization. That revised language is largely duplicative of existing protections for freedom of religion and freedom of association.}}

The LGBT caucus in the Texas House of Representatives worked to reduce the possible impact of the bill. In addition to removal of any reference to "marriage beliefs", and the substitution of objective associations with religious organizations for less-definable subjective "beliefs" or "convictions", opposing members achieved a further concession: A provision which would have allowed the Attorney General prosecutorial powers over government entities alleged to have contravened the bill was also removed. According to a 2019 report from TIME, the efforts of Democrats and the LGBT caucus rendered the bill much less threatening to LGBT rights than in its original design: "The new version of the bill essentially restates already-existing legal protections for freedom of religion and freedom of association," the Time reporter writes. Time also reports Texas House Rep. Jessica González, a Democrat and LGBT caucus member, as saying, "By the time the bill passed on Tuesday, it was mostly stripped of language that could have reduced LGBTQ rights." Nevertheless, González noted that, "Ultimately, the bill was born out of intolerance" and "It gives people the license to discriminate."{{cite magazine |last1=Gajanan |first1=Mahita |title=The Texas House Just Passed a Bill to 'Save Chick-fil-A' |url=https://time.com/5592701/texas-save-chick-fil-a-bill/ |access-date=14 March 2022 |magazine=Time |date=May 22, 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211009064209/https://time.com/5592701/texas-save-chick-fil-a-bill/ |archive-date=October 9, 2021 |language=en}}

{{See also|List of cities and counties in the United States offering an LGBT non-discrimination ordinance}}

[[File:Texas counties and cities with sexual orientation and gender identity protection.svg|thumb|right|300px|Map of Texas counties and cities that have sexual orientation and/or gender identity anti–employment discrimination ordinances

{{legend|#800080|Sexual orientation and gender identity with anti–employment discrimination ordinance}}

{{legend|#ff00ff|Sexual orientation and gender identity solely in public employment}}

{{legend|#00ffff|Sexual orientation in public employment}}

{{legend|#d0d0d0|Does not protect sexual orientation and gender identity in employment}}]]

The following Texas cities have ordinances prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity in housing, public accommodations, city employment, private employment and city contractors.

Austin,{{citation|url=https://library.municode.com/index.aspx?clientId=15302 |title=Chapters 5.1, 5.2, 5.3, and 5.4 of the Austin City Code |publisher=Amlegal.com |access-date=December 5, 2013}} Dallas,{{citation|url=http://www.amlegal.com/dallas_tx/|title=Dallas, Texas Code of Ordinances, Chapter 46, Article II|publisher=Amlegal.com |access-date=December 5, 2013}} Fort Worth,{{cite act |type=City of Fort Worth Code of Ordinances: S-11 Supplement containing local legislation current through Ordinance 24720-02-2021 |chapter=Human Relations (Chapter 17)|index=2021 S-11 |date=23 February 2021 |article=III: Discrimination |title=§ 17-1 — § 17-46 2021 Code of Ordinances |publisher=American Legal Publishing Corporation |language=en|access-date=26 February 2022 |archive-date=26 February 2022 |url=https://codelibrary.amlegal.com/codes/ftworth/latest/ftworth_tx/0-0-0-20492 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220226105959/https://codelibrary.amlegal.com/codes/ftworth/latest/ftworth_tx/0-0-0-20492 |url-status=dead }}{{citation|author1=Fort Worth City Council |url=http://fortworthgov.granicus.com/MinutesViewer.php?view_id=2&clip_id=705 |title=Council minutes: Ordinance 18909-11-2009, adopted November 10, 2009 |date=2009|access-date=26 February 2022 |archive-date=26 February 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220226114151/http://fortworthgov.granicus.com/MinutesViewer.php?view_id=2&clip_id=705}} Plano{{cite news | last=Cummings | first=Kevin | url=http://starlocalmedia.com/planocourier/plano-passes-equal-rights-ordinance/article_790e65d4-7fd8-11e4-b640-8fce14a52cb0.html | title=Plano passes equal rights ordinance | date=December 9, 2014 | access-date=December 11, 2014 | work=Plano Star Courier}} and San Antonio{{Cite news|url=https://www.texasobserver.org/san-antonios-colossal-lgbt-rights-fight/|title=Updated: San Antonio Passes LGBT Non-Discrimination Ordinance|date=September 5, 2013|work=The Texas Observer}}[https://library.municode.com/tx/san_antonio/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=PTIICO_CH2AD_ARTXNSCPO_DIV1GE_S2-552APOFBOCO Article X. - Non-Discrimination Policies] It shall be the general policy of the city to prohibit discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, veteran status, age or disability prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity in private and public employment, housing and public accommodations.

Denton has protections for sexual orientation and gender identity for city employment and city contractors.

El Paso has protections based on sexual orientation and gender identity for public accommodations and city employment.

Arlington, Brownsville, Corpus Christi, Houston, Irving, Lubbock, Mesquite and Waco have protections based on sexual orientation and gender identity for city employment—including city contractors in some cities—only. Houston previously had wide-ranging antidiscrimination measures that also covered residents and visitors, introduced in 2014, but these were soon repealed by voters in 2015.{{cite news |last1=Fernandez |first1=Manny |last2=Smith |first2=Mitch |title=Houston Voters Reject Broad Anti-Discrimination Ordinance |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/04/us/houston-voters-repeal-anti-bias-measure.html|work=The New York Times |access-date=7 June 2022 |date=November 3, 2015 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220331152413/https://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/04/us/houston-voters-repeal-anti-bias-measure.html |archive-date=31 March 2022}}{{cite news|url=https://abc13.com/archive/7364571/|title=Mayor extends city's non-discrimination policy|first=Miya|last=Shay|publisher=KTRK-TV|date=April 2, 2010|access-date=February 28, 2012}}

Grand Prairie,{{citation | title=Municipal Equality Index | url=http://www.hrc.org/files/assets/resources/MEI_2013_report.pdf | publisher=Human Rights Campaign | access-date=November 21, 2013 | archive-date=December 2, 2013 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131202231201/http://www.hrc.org/files/assets/resources/MEI_2013_report.pdf | url-status=dead }} McAllen, and Round Rock have a city policy prohibiting city employment discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation only.

The following school districts have both employee welfare and student welfare policies prohibiting discrimination based on sexual orientation, gender identity, and gender expression: {{hlist|Del Valle Independent School District (ISD){{citation|url=https://pol.tasb.org/Policy/Download/1152?filename=DIA(LOCAL).pdf|title=Del Valle ISD Employee Welfare Policy}}{{citation|url=https://pol.tasb.org/Policy/Download/1152?filename=FFH(LOCAL).pdf|title=Del Valle ISD Student Welfare Policy}}|Dallas ISD{{citation|url=http://pol.tasb.org/Policy/Download/361?filename=DIA(LOCAL).pdf|title=Employee Welfare Policy Dallas ISD|access-date=July 16, 2015|archive-date=July 17, 2015|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150717062243/http://pol.tasb.org/Policy/Download/361?filename=DIA(LOCAL).pdf|url-status=dead}}{{citation|url=http://pol.tasb.org/Policy/Download/361?filename=FFH(LOCAL).pdf|title=Student Welfare Policy Dallas ISD|access-date=July 16, 2015|archive-date=July 17, 2015|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150717032052/http://pol.tasb.org/Policy/Download/361?filename=FFH(LOCAL).pdf|url-status=dead}}|Fort Worth ISD{{citation|url=http://pol.tasb.org/Policy/Download/1101?filename=DIA(LOCAL).pdf|title=Employee Welfare Policy Ft. Worth ISD|access-date=July 16, 2015|archive-date=July 17, 2015|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150717002838/http://pol.tasb.org/Policy/Download/1101?filename=DIA(LOCAL).pdf|url-status=dead}}{{citation|url=http://pol.tasb.org/Policy/Download/1101?filename=FFH(LOCAL).pdf|title=Student Welfare Policy Ft. Worth ISD|access-date=July 16, 2015|archive-date=July 17, 2015|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150717035232/http://pol.tasb.org/Policy/Download/1101?filename=FFH(LOCAL).pdf|url-status=dead}}|Austin ISD{{citation|url=http://pol.tasb.org/Policy/Download/1146?filename=DIA(LOCAL).pdf|title=Employee Welfare Policy Austin ISD|access-date=July 16, 2015|archive-date=July 17, 2015|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150717032251/http://pol.tasb.org/Policy/Download/1146?filename=DIA(LOCAL).pdf|url-status=dead}}{{citation|url=http://pol.tasb.org/Policy/Download/1146?filename=FFH(LOCAL).pdf|title=Student Welfare Policy Austin ISD|access-date=July 16, 2015|archive-date=July 17, 2015|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150717063409/http://pol.tasb.org/Policy/Download/1146?filename=FFH(LOCAL).pdf|url-status=dead}}}} and Houston ISD.[http://pol.tasb.org/Policy/Download/592?filename=DIA(LOCAL).pdf Employee Welfare Policy Houston ISD] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150717025726/http://pol.tasb.org/Policy/Download/592?filename=DIA(LOCAL).pdf |date=July 17, 2015 }},{{Cite web |url=http://pol.tasb.org/Policy/Download/592?filename=FFH(LOCAL).pdf |title=Student Welfare Policy Houston ISD |access-date=July 16, 2015 |archive-date=July 17, 2015 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150717070357/http://pol.tasb.org/Policy/Download/592?filename=FFH(LOCAL).pdf |url-status=dead }}

El Paso ISD has similar protections, worded as "gender stereotyping and perceived sexuality."{{citation|url=https://www.episd.org/file_mgr/board/policy_manual/recent_updates/DIA%28LOCAL%29%20Employee%20Welfare%20Freedom%20from%20Discrimination%2C%20Harassment%2C%20and%20Retaliation%2010-2014.pdf|title=El Paso ISD Employee Welfare Policy|access-date=July 16, 2015|archive-date=July 17, 2015|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150717161922/https://www.episd.org/file_mgr/board/policy_manual/recent_updates/DIA%28LOCAL%29%20Employee%20Welfare%20Freedom%20from%20Discrimination%2C%20Harassment%2C%20and%20Retaliation%2010-2014.pdf|url-status=dead}}{{citation|url=https://www.episd.org/file_mgr/board/policy_manual/recent_updates/FFI%28LOCAL%29%20Student%20Welfare%20Freedom%20from%20Bullying%2010-2014.pdf|title=El Paso ISD Student Welfare Policy|access-date=July 16, 2015|archive-date=July 17, 2015|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150717083055/https://www.episd.org/file_mgr/board/policy_manual/recent_updates/FFI%28LOCAL%29%20Student%20Welfare%20Freedom%20from%20Bullying%2010-2014.pdf|url-status=dead}}

Cedar Hill ISD has protections for sexual orientation only.[http://pol.tasb.org/Policy/Download/360?filename=DIA(LOCAL).pdf Cedar Hill ISD Employee Welfare Policy] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150717004618/http://pol.tasb.org/Policy/Download/360?filename=DIA(LOCAL).pdf |date=July 17, 2015 }},{{citation|url=http://pol.tasb.org/Policy/Download/360?filename=FFH(LOCAL).pdf|title=El Paso Student Welfare Policy|access-date=July 16, 2015|archive-date=July 17, 2015|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150717034526/http://pol.tasb.org/Policy/Download/360?filename=FFH(LOCAL).pdf|url-status=dead}}

Pflugerville ISD has explicit protections for employees only,{{citation|url=https://pol.tasb.org/Policy/Download/1147?filename=DIA(LOCAL).pdf|title=Pflugerville ISD Employee Welfare Policy}} but these same explicit protections are missing from the student non-discrimination policy.{{citation|url=https://pol.tasb.org/Policy/Download/1147?filename=FFH(LOCAL).pdf|title=Pflugerville ISD Student Welfare Policy}}

The following universities have non-discrimination policies for students and employees based on sexual orientation, gender identity and gender expression

{{Static row numbers}}

{{hlist|The following universities have non-discrimination policies for students and employees based on sexual orientation and gender identity:| Lamar University |Sam Houston State University| and University of Texas at El Paso{{Cite web|url=https://www.utep.edu/|title=The University of Texas at El Paso - UTEP|website=www.utep.edu}} }}

The following universities have non-discrimination policies for students and employees based on sexual orientation only:{{div col||colwidth=20em}}

{{ubl|Angelo State University

|Midwestern State University (student protections only)

|Prairie View A&M

|Southwestern University

|Texas A&M Galveston

|Texas A&M International University{{citation|url=https://www.tamiu.edu/adminis/ohr/documents/eeo-presidentmemo.pdf |title=Reaffirmation of Commitment to Equal Opportunity, Access, and Affirmative Action}}

|Texas Southern University

|Texas Tech University

|Texas Woman's University (student protections only)

|University of Texas at Arlington{{citation|url=https://www.uta.edu/policy/hop/5-504?hl=sexual+orientation|title=Non-Discrimination Policy on Sexual Orientation}}

|University of Texas Brownsville

|University of Texas at Tyler

|University of Texas Permian Basin }}

{{div col end}}

The following universities have non-discrimination statements for sexual orientation for on-campus housing: {{div col|colwidth=15em}}

{{ubl|Angelo State University| Sam Houston State University|Southern Methodist University| Southwestern University |Tarleton State University|Texas A&M College Station| Texas A&M Galveston| Texas A&M International University| Texas A&M University–Kingsville| Texas A&M University–Texarkana|Texas Tech University|Texas Woman's University|University of North Texas (all campuses) |University of Texas at Dallas| University of Texas at El Paso.}}{{div col end}}

The following universities have non-discrimination statements for roommate selection and roommate requests based on sexual orientation:{{hlist| Georgetown University| Lamar University| Rice University| Texas A&M University Commerce |Texas State University|University of Texas San Antonio| and University of Texas Tyler.}}

In response to a national 2010 survey, 79 percent of Texans felt that these people were experiencing harassment or mistreatment at work, and 45 percent reported that they were not hired, 26 percent reported that they were fired, and 22 percent reported being denied a promotion because of their gender identity or expression.[https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/publications/employ-discrim-sogi-tx/ Employment Discrimination Based on Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity in Texas]

Aggregated data from two large public opinion polls find that 79% of Texas residents think that LGBTQ people experience a moderate amount to a lot of discrimination in the state.

In response to a national poll conducted in 2011, 73% of respondents from Texas said that employment discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity should be prohibited in the U.S.

{{see also|#Gender change records sought by Attorney General|#Transgender people in the performing arts}}

File:Texans protest the Trans bathroom bill outside the senate committee hearing on SB-6 (32468713294).jpg in 2017.]]

Texas has no specific provision regarding sex-marker change in statute. For people to legally change the sex ("gender") indicator on their birth certificates, Texas requires a court order. Judges may exercise their discretion, and, according to information compiled by the Travis County Law Library, judges "often look to the Current Standards of Care (SOC)"{{citation |work=Gender Marker Kit |title=Gender Marker Info Sheet with FAQs |url=https://lawlibrary.traviscountytx.gov/docs/GenderMarker_Kit_March_2017.pdf |access-date=25 June 2023 |author=((Travis County Law Library)) |date=1 March 2017 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230603154138/https://lawlibrary.traviscountytx.gov/docs/GenderMarker_Kit_March_2017.pdf |archive-date=3 June 2023 |quote=}} as set by the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH) when considering petitions.{{cite book |author1=World Professional Association for Transgender Health |author1-link=World Professional Association for Transgender Health |title=Standards of Care for the Health of Transsexual, Transgender, and Gender Nonconforming People |date=2012 |publisher=WPATH |edition=7th |url=https://www.wpath.org/publications/soc |language=en}}

• See also updated, 8th, version:

{{cite journal |last1=Coleman |first1=E. |last2=Radix |first2=A. E. |last3=Bouman |first3=W. P. |last4=Brown |first4=G. R. |last5=de Vries |first5=A. L. C. |last6=Deutsch |first6=M. B. |last7=Ettner |first7=R. |last8=Fraser |first8=L. |last9=Goodman |first9=M. |last10=Green |first10=J. |last11=Hancock |first11=A. B. |last12=Johnson |first12=T. W. |last13=Karasic |first13=D. H. |last14=Knudson |first14=G. A. |last15=Leibowitz |first15=S. F. |last16=Meyer-Bahlburg |first16=H. F. L. |last17=Monstrey |first17=S. J. |last18=Motmans |first18=J. |last19=Nahata |first19=L. |last20=Nieder |first20=T. O. |last21=Reisner |first21=S. L. |last22=Richards |first22=C. |last23=Schechter |first23=L. S. |last24=Tangpricha |first24=V. |last25=Tishelman |first25=A. C. |display-authors=6 |title=Standards of Care for the Health of Transgender and Gender Diverse People|id=Version 8 |journal=International Journal of Transgender Health |date=19 August 2022 |volume=23 |issue=Sup 1 |pages=S1–S259 |doi=10.1080/26895269.2022.2100644 |url=https://www.wpath.org/publications/soc |archive-date=19 June 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230619154941/https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/26895269.2022.2100644|hdl=2445/189561 |hdl-access=free }} Applicants are required to have undergone "appropriate treatment", but sex reassignment surgery, nor any other specific treatment, is not required. A "narrative statement" from a doctor or therapist stating the individual has received, in the health professional's opinion, appropriate care, and it is in their best interest that the person's record is changed must be included in the applicant's petition to the court.

In December 2022, it was reported by the Washington Post that the Attorney General's office had requested a full list of all gender changes on Texas driver's licenses and other department records. The Texas Department of Public Safety (DPS) were asked to provide the "total number of changes from male to female and female to male for the last 24 months [prior to June 2022], broken down by month" according to inter-departmental messages obtained by The Post. The DPS search resulted in more than 16,000 instances, but the department could not accurately determine the reasons for the marker changes without manually searching the records: Results included instances of changes due to error corrections, for example, and no method existed to extract records solely altered due to gender change, except by manual review of all related documentation.

A DPS spokesperson advised The Post that, therefore, "Ultimately, our team advised the AG's office the data requested neither exists nor could be accurately produced. Thus, no data of any kind was provided." The procedure followed to obtain these data did not conform to normal practise, according to the Washington Post. The newspaper's information is that usual channels for such requests were bypassed by going directly to driver license division staff. According to a state employee who spoke to The Post, DPS staff were told that "Paxton's office wanted 'numbers' and later would want 'a list' of names, as well as 'the number of people who had had a legal sex change.'{{hairspace}}"{{Cite news|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2022/12/14/texas-transgender-data-paxton/?request-id=2f507294-c5cc-48ff-a258-fd1d850b4ad5&pml=1 |title=Texas attorney general's office sought state data on transgender Texans |newspaper=Washington Post|date=December 14, 2022 |last1=Hennessy-Fiske |first1=Molly}}

In August 2024, it was announced that Texans would no longer be allowed to change the gender marker on their license, and that any who submitted such a request would see it denied and their name and identification number noted as having sought such a change.{{Cite news |work=Texas Tribune |url= https://www.texastribune.org/2024/08/21/transgender-texans-drivers-license-DPS/|title= Transgender Texans blocked from changing their sex on their driver's license}}

{{see also|#Efforts to restrict gender-affirming healthcare}}

On June 2, 2023, Governor Greg Abbott signed a bill (SB 14) to ban gender-affirming care for minors. Authored by state Sen. Donna Campbell, it prohibits hormone therapies and treatments which "block" the onset of puberty. Such treatments are supported in appropriate cases by the major medical groups, including the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Psychiatric Association, and the Endocrine Society.{{cite journal |last1=Rafferty |first1=Jason |last2=Yogman |first2=Michael |last3=Baum |first3=Rebecca |last4=Gambon |first4=Thresia B. |last5=Lavin |first5=Arthur |last6=Mattson |first6=Gerri |last7=Wissow |first7=Lawrence Sagin |last8=Breuner |first8=Cora |last9=Alderman |first9=Elizabeth M. |last10=Grubb |first10=Laura K. |last11=Powers |first11=Makia E. |last12=Upadhya |first12=Krishna |last13=Wallace |first13=Stephenie B. |last14=Hunt |first14=Lynn |last15=Gearhart |first15=Anne Teresa |last16=Harris |first16=Christopher |last17=Lowe |first17=Kathryn Melland |last18=Rodgers |first18=Chadwick Taylor |last19=Sherer |first19=Ilana Michelle |display-authors=6 |title=Ensuring Comprehensive Care and Support for Transgender and Gender-Diverse Children and Adolescents |journal=Pediatrics |date=1 October 2018 |volume=142 |issue=4 |doi=10.1542/peds.2018-2162 |id=FROM the American Academy of Pediatrics: POLICY STATEMENT|doi-access=free |pmid=30224363 }}{{cite news |author1=((American Psychiatric Association)) |title=Position Statement on Treatment of Transgender (Trans) and Gender Diverse Youth |url=https://www.psychiatry.org/File%20Library/About-APA/Organization-Documents-Policies/Policies/Position-Transgender-Gender-Diverse-Youth.pdf |id=APA Official Action: Approved by the Board of Trustees, July 2020; Approved by the Assembly, April 2020 |date=2020}}{{cite web |title=Transgender Health: An Endocrine Society Position Statement |url=https://www.endocrine.org/advocacy/position-statements/transgender-health |website=Endocrine Society |access-date=25 June 2023 |language=en |date=16 December 2020}}

When Abbott initially signed the bill, the American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU of Texas, Lambda Legal and the Transgender Law Center said they were preparing to fight its implementation in court.{{Cite news |last1=Nguyen |first1=Alex |last2=Melhado |first2=William |date=2023-06-02 |title=Gov. Greg Abbott signs legislation barring trans youth from accessing transition-related care |url=https://www.texastribune.org/2023/06/02/texas-gender-affirming-care-ban/ |access-date=2023-06-04 |work=The Texas Tribune |language=en}} In 2021, legal battles had achieved temporary injunctions against similar laws in other states.{{cite news |last1=Rummler |first1=Orion |title=Courts block laws targeting transgender children in Arkansas and West Virginia |url=https://19thnews.org/2021/07/judge-blocks-arkansas-law-criminalizing-gender-affirming-care-for-trans-kids/ |access-date=25 June 2023 |work=The 19th |date=21 July 2021 |language=en-us}}

However, on August 31, the day before the law was due to take effect, the Supreme Court of Texas allowed the law to go ahead.{{Cite web |date=2023-08-31 |title=Texas Law Banning Gender-Affirming Care For Minors Allowed To Take Effect |url=https://www.huffpost.com/entry/texas-transgender-gender-affirming-care-ban_n_64f0c992e4b0ca54cc6c094a |access-date=2023-08-31 |website=HuffPost |language=en}}

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton subpoenaed the medical records of trans kids from Seattle Children's Hospital and from QueerMed, a Georgia-based telehealth clinic. On April 22, 2024, Paxton's office announced a court settlement by which it would no longer seek to access transgender people's information from the Washington hospital, whose officials have denied giving gender-affirming care to any Texas minors.{{Cite web |last=Harper |first=Karen Brooks |date=2024-04-22 |title=Seattle Children's Hospital won't have to provide trans patient records to Texas under new settlement |url=https://www.texastribune.org/2024/04/22/texas-trans-health-care-investigation-seattle/ |access-date=2024-04-23 |website=The Texas Tribune |language=en}}{{Cite web |last=Rubin |first=Madaleine |date=2024-01-26 |title=Texas attorney general requests transgender youths' patient records from Georgia clinic |url=https://www.texastribune.org/2024/01/26/texas-attorney-general-trans-documents-georgia-ken-paxton/ |access-date=2024-04-23 |website=The Texas Tribune |language=en}}

On October 17, 2024, Texas attorney general Ken Paxton filed suit against a doctor who allegedly provided gender-affirming care to 21 minors after the treatments had been banned for minors in Texas, the first time that such a suit has been brought in the U.S.{{Cite web |last=Lavietes |first=Matt |last2=Yurcaba |first2=Jo |date=2024-10-17 |title=Texas AG sues doctor who allegedly provided transgender care to 21 minors |url=https://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/national-international/texas-ag-sues-doctor-allegedly-provided-transgender-care-minors/5898617/ |access-date=2024-10-17 |website=NBC News |language=en-US}}

In March 2024, the state implemented a new rule banning Medicaid from covering any form of hormone therapy for trans adults.{{Cite news |url=https://www.advocate.com/news/texas-gender-affirming-care-medicaid |work=Advocate |title= Texas quietly restricts gender-affirming care for trans adults: 'Canary in the coalmine'}}

In 2009, the Texas Legislature authorized a court order relating to a person's sex change to be acceptable proof of identity for a marriage license.{{citation|url=http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/FA/htm/FA.2.htm#2.005 |title=Texas Family Code sec. 2.005(b)(8) |publisher=Statutes.legis.state.tx.us |access-date=December 5, 2013}}

For geographical areas under the jurisdiction of the Texas Court of Appeals in San Antonio, the 1999 case Littleton v. Prange defined that, for purposes of determining the validity of a marriage, a person's sex is determined at birth and is not changed by surgery or drug therapy.{{cite court |litigants=Littleton v. Prange|vol=9 |opinion=223|court=Court of Appeals of Texas, San Antonio|date=1999 |reporter=S.W.3d |url=https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/2342598/littleton-v-prange/ |access-date=December 5, 2013}} This ruling allowed a person born male who transitioned to female to marry a woman in that court's jurisdiction.{{cite news|title=Lesbian Couple Get License to Wed; Transsexual Ruling Clears the Way|author1= Adolfo Pesquera|work=San Antonio Express-News|date= September 7, 2000}}{{cite news |url=http://www.statesman.com/news/texas-politics/abbott-declines-transgender-marriage-question-852534.html |title=Abbott Declines Transgender Marriage Question |author1=Chuck Lindell|work=Austin American-Statesman|date=August 10, 2010 |publisher=Statesman.com |access-date=December 5, 2013 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110716134641/http://www.statesman.com/news/texas-politics/abbott-declines-transgender-marriage-question-852534.html |archive-date=July 16, 2011 |df=mdy-all }} In February 2014, the Texas Court of Appeals in Corpus Christi held that state law had changed since Littleton and now recognized sex reassignment, so that parties to a lawsuit contesting whether or not a marriage was an invalid same-sex marriage or a valid different-sex marriage needed to have their dispute heard by a trial court.{{cite news |last1=Molloy |first1=Parker |title=Texas Appeals Court Rules in Favor of Trans Widow |url=https://www.advocate.com/politics/transgender/2014/02/14/texas-appeals-court-rules-favor-trans-widow |access-date=14 November 2022 |work=The Advocate |date=14 February 2014}}

{{broader|Transgender people in sports}}

In October 2021, the Texas Legislature passed a bill, HB25, to legally ban transgender individuals within any female sports, Olympics, or athletics teams.{{Cite web|title=Movement Advancement Project: Bans on Transgender Youth Participation in Sports|url=https://www.lgbtmap.org/equality-maps/sports_participation_bans|access-date=2022-02-24|website=www.lgbtmap.org|language=en}}{{Cite news|last=Waller|first=Allyson|date=2021-10-25|title=Restrictions on transgender student athletes' participation in school sports signed into law by Gov. Greg Abbott|url=https://www.texastribune.org/2021/10/25/texas-transgender-students-sports/|access-date=2022-02-24|work=The Texas Tribune|language=en}}{{Cite web|title=Texas Senate Passes Anti-Transgender Sports Ban Bill|url=https://www.hrc.org/press-releases/texas-senate-passes-anti-transgender-sports-ban-bill|access-date=2022-02-24|website=Human Rights Campaign|date=April 14, 2021 |language=en-US}} The Governor of Texas Greg Abbott signed the bill into law,{{Cite web|title=Gov. Greg Abbott signs Texas bill restricting transgender participation in school sports|url=https://au.sports.yahoo.com/gov-greg-abbott-signs-texas-bill-restricting-transgender-participation-in-school-sports-010057332.html|access-date=2022-02-24|website=au.sports.yahoo.com|date=October 26, 2021 |language=en-AU}} which went into legal effect from January 18, 2022.{{Citation|title=Texas HB25 2021 87th Legislature 3rd Special Session|url=https://legiscan.com/TX/bill/HB25/2021/X3|access-date=2022-02-24|website=LegiScan|language=en}}

The bill requires that students enrolled in public schools may only participate in athletic competitions within the sex (or "gender") category they were assigned at birth. This means that if the officially registered sex at birth differs from one's gender identity and expression, an individual may not participate in events or in teams of that gender identity, but only in those for their "original" sex.{{Cite news |last=Treisman |first=Rachel |date=2021-10-27 |title=Texas' new law restricts transgender athletes' participation on school sports teams |language=en |work=NPR |url=https://www.npr.org/2021/10/27/1049634164/texas-new-law-restricts-transgender-athletes-participation-on-school-sports-team |access-date=2022-05-29}} The restriction applies in all public schools from Kindergarten to 12th grade in Texas.

The stated intention of the bill is fairness in school sports by preventing any physical advantage that transgender students may have.{{cite news |agency=Reuters |date=2021-10-26 |title=Texas signs into law bill banning transgender athletes from school sports |url=https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2021/oct/26/texas-signs-into-law-bill-banning-transgender-athletes-from-school-sports |access-date=2022-05-29 |work=The Guardian |language=en}} Possible advantages of concern are stated, for example, as a competitor having biological male sex, with likely increased muscle mass and strength, compared to the average competitor of female sex, but competing as a female. In this way—proponents of the bill believe—the transgender individual would have an unfair advantage. Against this, the higher production of testosterone that promotes greater muscle and bone mass does not commence until adolescence, before which there is negligible sex-based group differences between boys and girls, in terms of speed, strength, stamina and other sports-related traits. Post adolescence, biological males as a {{em|group}} will, on average, have certain physical advantages over females as a {{em|group}}. Such secondary sex characteristics do not necessarily confer advantages in all sports. Additionally, while feminizing hormone therapy itself dramatically reduces testosterone, anti-androgen medication is often used in conjunction with estrogen to suppress masculinizing effects, which leads to decreases in muscle mass.{{Cite web |title=Transgender Health Treatments |url=https://www.endocrine.org/patient-engagement/endocrine-library/transgender-health-treatments |access-date=2022-08-13 |website=www.endocrine.org |date=March 10, 2022 |language=en}}{{Cite web |title=Feminizing hormone therapy - Mayo Clinic |url=https://www.mayoclinic.org/tests-procedures/feminizing-hormone-therapy/about/pac-20385096 |access-date=2022-08-13 |website=www.mayoclinic.org}}

The HB25 bill is more extensive than existing University Interscholastic League (UIL) rules which has the similar requirement of students only being allowed to participate in athletic competitions with the same group of assigned sex. However, the UIL rule accepts amended birth certificates, which allows transgender people to participate with the opposite sex if in their official certificate it has changed.{{Cite web |last=League |first=University Interscholastic |title=Constitution and Contest Rules — University Interscholastic League (UIL) |url=https://www.uiltexas.org/policy/constitution/general/nondiscrimination |access-date=2022-05-29 |website=www.uiltexas.org |language=en}} HB25 has no written guidance on how schools are to carry out and enforce the bill, but language in the bill directs to the UIL to create said process.{{Cite web |title=Anti-transgender sports ban, HB 25, goes into effect today |url=https://www.equalitytexas.org/anti-transgender-sports-ban-hb-25-goes-into-effect-today/ |access-date=2022-05-29 |website=Equality Texas |date=January 18, 2022 |language=en}} UIL's language upholds Title IX, the federal law that prohibits any discrimination based on sex.{{Cite web |last=Waller |first=Allyson |date=2021-10-25 |title=Restrictions on transgender student athletes' participation in school sports signed into law by Gov. Greg Abbott |url=https://www.texastribune.org/2021/10/25/texas-transgender-students-sports/ |access-date=2022-05-29 |website=The Texas Tribune |language=en}}

File:Austin Pride 2011 071101 5944 (6142596515).jpg]]

On May 11, 2001, Governor Rick Perry signed House Bill 587,{{Citation|url=http://www.legis.state.tx.us/tlodocs/77R/billtext/html/HB00587F.htm |title=Enrolled version of House Bill 587, 77th Texas Legislature, Regular Session, 2001 |publisher=Legis.state.tx.us |access-date=December 5, 2013}} popularly but unofficially known as the James Byrd Jr. Hate Crimes Act,"Texas Governor Signs Hate Crimes Bill", (May 12, 2001). Associated Press which strengthened penalties for certain crimes motivated by a victim's race, color, disability, religion, national origin or ancestry, age, gender, or sexual preference. This legislation did not cover gender identity.{{efn-ua|name="title 5"}}

In the first decade after the law took effect on September 1, 2001, local law enforcement agencies had reported about 200 crimes per year as hate crimes. However, fewer than one case a year on average had been successfully prosecuted in Texas as a hate crime.{{cite news|url=https://www.statesman.com/story/news/2012/01/22/texas-hate-crime-law-has/6694336007/ |title=Texas hate crime law has little effect |work=Austin American-Statesman |author1=Eric Dexheimer |publisher=Statesman.com |date=January 24, 2012 |access-date=December 5, 2013}} This is among the states with the lowest percentage of prosecuted hate crimes.

The Texas Department of State Health Services has developed model education programs on AIDS and HIV; however, Texas law requires that the "materials in the education programs intended for persons younger than 18 years of age ... state that homosexual conduct is not an acceptable lifestyle and is a criminal offense...."{{citation|url=http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/HS/htm/HS.85.htm |title=Texas Health and Safety Code sec. 85.007(b) |publisher=Statutes.legis.state.tx.us |access-date=December 5, 2013}} In practice, few school districts include that language about homosexual conduct in their sex education materials.{{cite news |url=http://washingtonindependent.com/104961/crime-of-%E2%80%98homosexual-conduct%E2%80%99-still-on-the-books-in-texas |title=Crime of 'homosexual conduct' still on the books in Texas|work=The Washington Independent|date=January 13, 2011 |access-date=December 5, 2013 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140416191647/http://washingtonindependent.com/104961/crime-of-%E2%80%98homosexual-conduct%E2%80%99-still-on-the-books-in-texas |archive-date=2014-04-16}}

In November 2020, the Texas Board of Education updated the sex education materials policy,{{Cite web|url=https://nonprofitquarterly.org/after-23-years-texas-revises-its-sex-education-policies/|last=Levine|first=Carole|title=After 23 Years, Texas Revises Its Sex Education Policies|date=23 November 2020|website=Nonprofit Quarterly|access-date=January 30, 2024}} and voted in favor of changing the anti-bullying definition to include “sexual bullying". There was an effort by 5 Democratic board members to expand the policy to include “bullying and harassment because of sexual orientation and gender identity or expression,” but was blocked by 10 Republican members of the board.

{{As of|December 2020}}, the Texas "no promo homo law" still remains on the statute books.

In October 2024, the city of Odessa passed a bounty ordinance that allows individuals to sue transgender people who use bathrooms that don't correspond to their biological sex, regardless of whether or not they've changed their legal gender. The ordinance requires the plaintiff to sue for a minimum of $10,000 and sets no maximum.[https://www.lgbtqnation.com/2024/10/city-puts-10000-bounty-of-trans-peoples-heads-if-they-use-a-public-restroom/]

{{Clear}}

Since 2009, Texans between the ages of 18 and 29 have increasingly supported same-sex marriage at a faster rate than that of the general population. In June 2009, the University of Texas found that 49% of that age group supported same-sex marriage as opposed to 29% of the general population. In February 2013, it found that 59% of them did so, while only 37% of the general population had the same opinion. Opposition from Texans between the ages of 18 and 29 dropped 12 points in the same period, from 28 to 16%. At the same time, opposition from the general population in Texan dropped 5 points, from 52.7% to 47.5%.{{cite web | title=The Polling Center: Texans' View of Gay Marriage Shifts | url=http://www.texastribune.org/2013/03/26/polling-center-texans-view-gay-marriage-shifts/ | publisher=Texas Tribune | date=March 26, 2013 | access-date=April 6, 2013}} Glengariff Group, Inc., in conjunction with the pro-LGBT rights Equality Texas Foundation, found that support in that age group rose from 53.6% in 2010 to 67.9% in 2013, while within the general population in Texas, support rose from 42.7% to 47.9%.{{cite web | title=LGBTQ Texas Issues Survey | url=https://equalityfederation.salsalabs.com/o/35034/images/2013%20Equality%20Texas%20Foundation%20Statewide%20Survey%20Report.pdf | publisher=Glengariff Group, Inc. | access-date=July 4, 2013}}

Later polls have found that a majority of Texans support same-sex marriage. A 2017 Public Religion Research Institute poll, for example, showed support for same-sex marriage in Texas at 55 percent. Thirty-four percent were opposed and 11 percent were unsure.{{cite web|url=http://ava.prri.org/#lgbt/2017/States/lgbt_ssm/m/US-TX|title=PRRI – American Values Atlas|first=Epicenter|last=Consulting|website=ava.prri.org}}

The Transgender Education Network of Texas (TENT) works to further gender diversity equity in the U.S. state of Texas.{{cite web|title=Transgender Education Network of Texas|url=http://www.transtexas.org/|website=Transgender Education Network of Texas|access-date=14 March 2018}} As of 2016, the organization was registered as a 501(c)(3) not-for-profit organization in the United States.

TENT was founded in 2002 as the Austin Transgender Ordinance Initiative.{{cite news|last1=Marloff|first1=Sarah|title=The State of Trans Health Care|url=https://www.austinchronicle.com/news/2017-04-14/the-state-of-trans-health-care/|access-date=11 April 2018|work=Austin Chronicle|date=14 April 2017}} TENT's main work is in education, advocacy, and empowerment, and it works in both public and private forums to prevent discrimination against transgender, non-binary, and intersex people in Texas. It also supports pro-transgender legislation in Texas.{{cite news|last1=Auping|first1=Alicia|title=Eleven Dallas LGBTQ Movers and Shakers|url=http://www.dallasobserver.com/arts/eleven-dallas-lgbt-movers-and-shakers-7096313|access-date=May 22, 2018|work=Dallas Observer|date=July 19, 2013}}

TENT is a member of the Austin LGBT Chamber of Commerce.{{cite web|title=Transgender Education Network of Texas|url=https://www.austinlgbtchamber.com/list/member/transgender-education-network-of-texas-austin-80|website=Austin LGBTQ Chamber of Commerce|access-date=May 22, 2018|archive-date=May 23, 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180523011554/https://www.austinlgbtchamber.com/list/member/transgender-education-network-of-texas-austin-80|url-status=dead}} In community advocacy, it partners with other organizations such as the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Texas, Anti-Defamation League of Central Texas, Equality Texas, Human Rights Campaign and the Texas Freedom Network.{{cite web|title=Broad Coalition of Policy Experts, Advocates Warn of Consequences of Anti-LGBTQ Bills in Texas|url=https://www.aclutx.org/en/press-releases/broad-coalition-policy-experts-advocates-warn-consequences-anti-lgbtq-bills-texas|website=ACLU of Texas|access-date=17 March 2018|language=en|date=19 January 2017}}{{Dead link|date=May 2023 |bot=InternetArchiveBot |fix-attempted=yes }}

In addition to offering "cultural competency" seminars, workshops and presentations itself to a variety of organizations, TENT has also collaborated with other research and education initiatives. One such research collaboration aimed to understand and improve the education of transgender-related health topics within Texas nursing programs' curricula.{{cite journal|last1=Walsh|first1=David|last2=Hendrickson|first2=Sherry Garrett|title=Focusing on the "T" in LGBTQ: An Online Survey of Related Content in Texas Nursing Programs|journal=Journal of Nursing Education|date=1 June 2015|volume=54|issue=6|pages=347–351|doi=10.3928/01484834-20150515-07|pmid=26057430}}

One of the organization's primary focuses has been collecting the testimonies of transgender, non-binary, and intersex people and their allies in Texas. Many of these testimonies were collected specifically in reaction to the proposal of Texas SB6, a "bathroom bill" intending to limit bathroom access based on the sex listed on one's birth certificate. The organization maintains a record of testimony provided to the Texas State Senate's committee of State Affairs regarding SB6 by transgender, non-binary, and intersex people and their allies on its website.{{cite web|title=Stop SB6|url=http://www.transtexas.org/StopSB6/|website=Transgender Education Network of Texas|access-date=14 March 2018|archive-date=May 2, 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180502211248/http://www.transtexas.org/stopsb6/|url-status=dead}}{{cite news|last1=Planas|first1=Roque|title=Texas Senate OKs Trans Bathroom Restrictions|url=http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/texas-senate-bathroom-bill_us_59779857e4b0c95f375f513c|access-date=17 March 2018|work=Huffington Post|date=26 July 2017|language=en}}

In March 2018, as part of a coalition with ACLU of Texas, Equality Texas, and Lambda Legal, TENT created TxTransKids.org, a support network and resource center for elementary and high school transgender students and their families.{{cite news|author1=((American Civil Liberties Union of Texas))|title=LGBTQ Rights Groups Launch Resource Hub for Transgender Youth|url=https://www.aclu.org/news/lgbtq-rights-groups-launch-resource-hub-transgender-youth|access-date=11 April 2018|work=Targeted News Service|date=29 March 2018}}

{{Portal|Texas|LGBTQ|Law}}

{{div col|colwidth=30em}}

• Equality Texas
• LGBT rights in the United States
• LGBT rights by country or territory
• List of U.S. state constitutional amendments banning same-sex unions by type
• Law of Texas
• LGBT culture in Dallas-Fort Worth
• LGBT culture in Houston
• No promo homo laws, also known as the Don't Say Gay law

{{div col end}}

{{notelist-ua|refs=

{{efn-ua|name="title 5"|1=(a) In the trial of an offense under Title 5, Penal Code, or Section 28.02, 28.03, or 28.08, Penal Code, the judge shall make an affirmative finding of fact and enter the affirmative finding in the judgment of the case if at the guilt or innocence phase of the trial, the judge or the jury, whichever is the trier of fact, determines beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant intentionally selected the person against whom the offense was committed or intentionally selected property damaged or affected as a result of the offense because of the defendant's bias or prejudice against a group identified by race, color, disability, religion, national origin or ancestry, age, gender, or sexual preference. (c) In this article, "sexual preference" has the following meaning only: a preference for heterosexuality, homosexuality, or bisexuality."{{Citation|url=http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/CR/htm/CR.42.htm#42.014 |title=Article 42.014 of the Code of Criminal Procedure |publisher=Statutes.legis.state.tx.us |access-date=December 5, 2013}} House Bill 3324 introduced by Representative Garnet Coleman in the Legislature's 2013 regular session would have added gender identity or expression to the hate crime law;{{Citation|url=http://www.legis.state.tx.us/tlodocs/83R/billtext/pdf/HB03324I.pdf#navpanes=0 |title=House Bill 3324 - Introduced Text, 83rd Legislature, Regular Session, 2013 |access-date=December 5, 2013}} however, the bill died in the Criminal Jurisprudence committee of the House of Representatives.{{citation|url=http://www.legis.state.tx.us/billlookup/Actions.aspx?LegSess=83R&Bill=HB3324 |title=House Bill 3324 History, 83rd Legislature, Regular Session, 2013 |publisher=Legis.state.tx.us |access-date=December 5, 2013}}}}

{{efn-ua|name="new bc"|1=New birth certificates with updated gender (sex) are issued under "Title 3. Vital Statistics" of the Texas Health & Safety Code, § 192.011. However, according to the {{abbr|NCTE|National Center for Transgender Equality}}, officials of "some counties and judges are averse to issuing the necessary court orders." There is no requirement for the application or processing of change orders to be made in a specific county, so applicants are free to choose any Texas county, if concerned they may be refused by a particular county.|2=}}

}}

{{Reflist|30em}}

• {{cite news |last1=Méndez |first1=María |title=Texas Legislature 101: Understanding the state government and how it passes laws |url=https://www.texastribune.org/2023/01/10/texas-legislature-2023-bills-laws-governor-speaker-lieutenant-governor/ |work=The Texas Tribune |date=10 January 2023 |language=en}}
• [https://archive.today/20130109164431/http://ontd-political.livejournal.com/6811602.html "Understanding Transgender Marriage in Texas Law", ONTD Political, August 19, 2010]
• [https://web.archive.org/web/20161118183544/http://houstonfamilyattorneysblog.com/2010/05/does-texas-allow-transgender-marriages.html "Does Texas Allow Transgender Marriages?", The Houston Family Law Blog, authored by Laura Fishman, May 7, 2010]
• [http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/10/28/798133/-Texas-and-the-Hate-Crimes-Act "Texas and the Hate Crimes Act", Daily Kos, October 28, 2009]
• [http://www.glapn.org/sodomylaws/sensibilities/texas.htm The Sensibilities of Our Forefathers: The History of Sodomy Laws in the United States - Texas], by George Painter

• [http://www.equalitytexas.org Equality Texas]
• {{cite web |title=Legislative Bill Tracker 2023 (Texas Legislature 2023 Legislative Session) |url=https://www.equalitytexas.org/legislature/legislative-bill-tracker-2023/ |website=Equality Texas |date=December 16, 2022 |language=en}}
• [http://www.transtexas.org Transgender Education Network of Texas]
• [http://www.txwins.org Texas Wins Campaign]
• [https://web.archive.org/web/20101202200858/http://www.stonewalldemocrats.org/chapters/TX Stonewall Democrats - Texas]

{{LGBTQ rights in the United States}}

{{LGBT in Texas}}

{{DEFAULTSORT:LGBT Rights In Texas}}

Rights

Texas

Category:Politics of Texas

Category:Texas law