In The Den with Mama Dragons

Lambda Legal and the Fight for Trans Rights

• Episode 109

Share episode

Send us a text

In today’s episode of In the Den, we confront a reality that far too many of our trans children are facing–relentless attacks from state legislatures and federal policies, bans on gender affirming care, restrictions targeting identity and expression, bathrooms, and pronouns. Trans people are under siege like never before, but there are also amazing champions for trans rights, including today’s special guest Carl Charles, senior attorney for Lambda Legal. 


Special Guest: Carl Charles


Carl Charles is an experienced LGBTQ civil rights attorney focused on trans justice. He is currently serving as a Senior Attorney with Lambda Legal in their Southern Regional Office. Before working with Lambda Legal, Carl was a staff attorney at A Better Balance, the New York City Commission on Human Rights, and was a Skadden Fellow with the ACLU LGBT and HIV Project. Outside of work, Carl can be found cuddling and giving treats to his two dogs, Pipa and Lila, and sometimes also to his spouse, Chris, in their home in Atlanta, GA. 


Links from the Show:


In the Den is made possible by generous donors like you. Help us continue to deliver quality content by becoming a donor today at www.mamadragons.org. 

Connect with Mama Dragons:
Website
Instagram
Facebook

Donate to this podcast



SARA: Hi, everyone. Welcome to In the Den with Mama Dragons. A podcast and community to support, educate, and empower parents on the journey of raising happy and healthy LGBTQ+ humans. I’m your host, Sara LaWall. I’m a Mama Dragon myself and an advocate for our queer community. And I’m so glad to be part of this wild and wonderful parenting journey with all of you. Thanks for joining us. We’re so glad you’re here.

Hello, Mama Dragons community. In today’s episode, we are confronting a reality far too many of our beloveds are facing: relentless attacks on transgender rights, from state legislatures and federal policies. We’re seeing bans on healthcare for trans youth, restrictions targeting identity and expression, bathrooms and pronouns. Our trans communities are under siege like never before.

But in the face of this, we have also seen some amazing champions fighting on behalf of our beloveds in courtrooms across the country and in the Supreme Court. And joining us today is one of those champions, Carl Charles. Carl is the Senior Attorney with Lambda Legal, an organization at the forefront of the fight for LGBTQ+ rights and protections. And Carl works tirelessly to combat discriminatory policies and defend the rights and dignity of trans individuals across the country.

Today we are going to unpack some of these big challenges posed by these attacks, explore some of the legal strategies being deployed to fight back, and learn how we can all join in, in this critical battle for equality.

Carl, welcome to In the Den!

CARL: Thank you so much for having me.

SARA: You’re so welcome. I’m excited to have this conversation with you today. I know, Carl, you’ve been a Senior Attorney with Lambda Legal for about five years now. And so I’m hoping you can tell us a little bit more about the organization as whole and the work and their mission in our world.

CARL: Yeah. So Lambda Legal is actually the nation's oldest and largest LGBTQ+ Legal Advocacy group. We’ve been around. We just celebrated our 50th Year, in 2023. We were started in 1973. And our first client was ourselves. We had to petition the state government in the state of New York for our right to exist. And our initial petition was denied because, “Homosexuals don’t need lawyers.” How far we have come.

SARA: Oh, my.

CARL: How far we have come. So Lambda has been around for half a century, which is incredible to say out loud to you. We have done an immense amount of work in that time. We are uniquely focused on achieving formal and lived equality for all LGBTQ people and everyone living with HIV or AIDS. So our focus is LGBTQ+ people and also anyone living with HIV or AIDS. So we’ve had, just so folks know, we’ve represented a lot of straight clients in that vein of our work for HIV/AIDS advocacy which has been around for just about as long as we have.

SARA: That’s an incredible story. I’ve known about Lambda Legal for some time, but did not know that story. And I’m so glad you shared it with us. That’s really inspiring. And I’m so grateful for the organization for all that work that it has been doing and really being a leader in the forefront of the legal landscape around rights and protections because, you know, in the past couple years, I know you’ve all seen it. We’re just seeing this wave, this unprecedented wave, of attacks, particularly on the trans community at state legislatures, at the federal level. It’s ramping up even moreso now in this current administration. Can you kind of give us a big-picture overview of some of the big, key issues and legislative threats that we’re facing in this moment?

CARL: Yeah. Gosh. So we really saw, as you mentioned, that advent of anti-trans advocacy sort of emerging, frankly, around the same time that trans people were coming into the public consciousness across the United States. Right? Trans people and our inclusion in life and the people’s lives and in the media was really sort of reaching one of many pinnacles. We’ve had several throughout history. But around 2014, about midway through the second Obama Administration was when trans people started to percolate for many people into their consciousness. And, unfortunately, around that same time we saw our opponents really come out in force. And I like to point to – although there were certainly efforts before 2014-2016 – We really saw things kick off around that time with the state-wide facilities ban in North Carolina which your listeners may remember as HV2. It garnered incredible public attention really in particular because of the supportive response from the business community, from the state, from people in North Carolina. You’ll recall that the NBA threatened to move the finals – or did move the finals I think – from North Carolina that year. There was a huge, really effective boycott effort. And North Carolina saw what can happen when we have communities standing in solidarity with us in response to these unjust attacks on our community. So that’s really where we really started to see state legislatures trying to get involved in trying to regulate trans people out of public life. And those initial bills really focused on bathrooms, right. There was a big hey-day around bathrooms. There was a really well-publicized effort in Texas to overturn Houston’s Anti-discrimination ordinance. And, again, this is one of the biggest cities in the country. And there was a really heinous attack on trans people in the local media there that helped remove that protection from the city ordinance. And then, slowly but surely, other state legislatures started proposing these anti-trans measures. Focused again, like I said, mostly on bathrooms. And then we started to see the sports bans emerge towards the beginning of the Trump Administration. We also, of course, saw during Trump 1.0 the Trans Military Ban, right. One of the first very clumsy things that the federal administration took on was a tweet that came from Trump’s, then, Twitter account saying that trans people shouldn’t be in the military. That he had talked to his generals and it was a bad idea. And so I was at Lambda Legal at the time as a Fellow before I was joined as a staff attorney. And we spent a lot of time trying to figure out, “Is a tweet official government policy?” We’re past that world now, I’m happy to say. But the answer is yes. And so the Trump Administration really paved the way and emboldened a lot of states to continue to pass legislation, try to pass legislation that targeted trans people’s access to restrooms, their ability to participate in school sports, that targeted curriculum bans and book bans. We started to see some of those kinds of laws within the last few years here. And then, really, what we’ve seen, I would say, in the last two years, or really during the Biden Administration, the legislation really at the forefront of anti-trans attack has been these bans on medical care for trans youth. And those are concerning on a number of levels, those bans. But that’s sort of where we’re at at this juncture. And I think things sort of ebb and flow, like the bathroom legislation was for a time, really, unsuccessful. And we saw it go away in the states. It wasn’t as popular to bring forward. And then there was a wave of the sports bans. And now that the gender-affirming care bans have emerged, but we’re starting to see a resurgence of facility and bathroom bans once again. So there are some really prominent themes when we’re looking at the ways that our opponents are trying to attack the trans community.

SARA: That’s a lot, but thank you for that overview. It’s really helpful. I’m curious in this current landscape, what are some of the big cases that Lambda Legal has taken on?

CARL: A piece of our history that I would be remiss if I didn’t mention because it’s personally really important to me and also helps answer your question, is that Lambda Legal was actually one of the first, if not really the first, to represent trans folks in a significant capacity. We represented the estate of Brandon Teena who many of your listeners will know was a trans man from Nebraska. I’m from Colorado, the state right next door. Brandon Teena was a trans man just trying to make his way as a young man in the 90’s. And was brutally murdered along with two of his friends. The outcry from that really helped spark a conversation about trans people and the violence that we are statistically more likely to experience. And so Lambda represented Brandon Teena’s estate against the county sheriff who failed to protect him even though he had credible knowledge that Brandon was being targeted for violence and assault, and had previously reported an assault to that sheriff. So that was the beginning of Lambda Legal’s work. And really since that time, we have expanded to the extent that more than half of our case docket is our trans-rights cases. And that certainly wasn’t necessarily the focus on the early aughts, during the days of marriage equality fights. We had a few cases on behalf of trans clients. But now we have really made it almost a singular focus, I would say. And that really just reflects the need of the community, right. So we have cases in various states challenging healthcare bans for both youth and adults. We have cases in, for example, we’ve just received a favorable decision from the Montana Supreme Court. Folks in Idaho may have seen your neighbors out there ruling that the health care ban in Montana violates the State Constitution, or at least at the preliminary stage. We’ve still got a trial coming up which my colleague Kell Olson will be working on. So we’ve got an iron in every fire. We’re taking on other health care bans in states like North Carolina. We’re taking on restrictions in health care access for folks who are Medicaid in Florida. We’re also bringing challenges and have continued to do work in Texas against laws which are really – fortunately there are not a lot of these bills or laws being proposed in the states – but Texas has really cornered the market on Cruelty, is what I will say, aimed at trans children and their families, threatening to remove children from loving and supportive parents under the guise of the Department of Children and Family Services. And so we have been involved in efforts to protect and defend the rights of trans youth and their families in Texas in that vein. We’ve also done a number of trans sports ban challenges. And we’ve been successful both in West Virginia and in Tennessee, challenging bans on trans youth participation in school sports. So we really are trying to do it all, which everyone knows is not always possible. So we try to be thoughtful about what we take on. But there really is a lot of work to do right now.

SARA: Yeah. Unfortunately there’s so much. Thank you. It’s great to hear all of the different places and spaces that your work is focused on. And I want to get a little wonky for the legal wonks among us because I’m really curious, what are some of the legal strategies that are effective in countering some of these discriminatory measures? And I’m thinking in particular when public opinion is so polarized.

CARL: I think some of the arguments that have been the most compelling to the courts have been based on our constitution, on the federal constitution. The right to equal protection under the law, the right to due process, those continue to be the pillars of civil rights in the United States. And we stand on the shoulders in our movement of movements that came before us. It’s important to mention that a lot of the work that we’ve been able to do on behalf of LGBTQ, and specifically for our conversation on behalf of trans people here, reflects the work that racial justice advocates and civil rights organizers and lawyers were doing back in the 1954, Brown Vs. Board of Education days. When folks were using the 14th Amendment to really protect and defend people’s ability to secure their rights to access all kinds of public goods, if we can call education a good. But really, the ability to live in a non-segregated society, the ability to go to school with your peers, have jobs free from discrimination. You’ll often hear arguments from our opponents about “textualism” and “originalism” when it comes to the Constitution, right. Thinking about the original words and not who we might interpret them in a modern way. But in the Bostock Decision from 2020 when the Supreme Court said that Title VII which is a statute, not within the Constitution – a federal statute – prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex. They didn’t qualify. They didn’t say “Sex, but not those people over there.” The word says “Sex” and Justice Gorsuch, that is his bread and butter approach is textualism and originalism. And he said, “Look, when you discriminate against trans people, you do so on the basis of sex.” And so we understand that these really ancient, well not ancient but old certainly, documents continue to be used to protect and defend our rights today. Even though we may not have been the people that the authors of those documents were contemplating.

SARA: It’s always interesting to me to hear that argument but then to also think about some of the antiquated things that are, to us, kind of preposterous right now, suggesting that a person is 3/5ths of a person and things like that. So there’s a little paradoxical thinking in some of those arguments. And along those lines, I’m curious how you all respond and talk about arguments that are made around these laws where we’re hearing a lot of the conservative side talk about “protecting children.” How do you respond to that?

CARL: There are a lot of ways to respond to that. It’s really, as you were saying, it’s really paradoxical the way that our opponents try to characterize bans on medical care for trans people – or for trans youth in particular I think was the core of your question – as being protective, of protecting young people. And I think that the idea of protecting children has been used to justify a lot of discrimination against other groups of people, right. So, again, that’s a very historical “dog whistle” that we’ve heard before. As is, right, “protecting women.” That’s another one that means nothing and everything all at once.

SARA: And that one’s coming back in full force all of the sudden.

CARL: Yes. Thank you, Anita Bryant for that. So a lot of these approaches are – I reference Anita Bryant who in the 70’s had a campaign against queer teachers, against having adults in classrooms teaching children, just existing as gay people, no indoctrination, just being a queer person who was a teacher. She mounted a campaign against an anti-discrimination ordinance in Florida that protected people in their workplace. And then, really, had the same refrain of “Let’s protect the children.” And really what that means is “We think that if we try to marginalize and discriminate against LGBTQ people enough, they will just go away,” right. We can root out this, however they characterize it, illness, sin, whatever they decide to call it, by just making us disappear. And the truth of the matter is, that is really never successful. And this particular iteration, I think there’s unfortunately some traction has been gained in this “Protect the children” idea because we are, as a function of this discussion, we’re talking about really specifically children’s bodies, not just their minds, right. And so unfortunately that has given our opponents a different tool to utilize this really ignorant and hateful rhetoric. And so how we typically respond is relying on the science and medicine which is decades old, which has really have evidenced for us and for countless families and parents across the United States that these medical interventions are not only safe and effective, but they’re being used by cisgender children in higher rates with the same kinds of risks and potential side effects, right. And I think embedded in a lot of the discussion is the idea that children’s parents who are loving and accepting them, don’t really understand and are making bad decisions. And so we have taken that argument on really directly as well to say that “We allow parents to consent to really all kinds of things on behalf of their children,” right. Actually the Supreme Court has said over and over again that the “buck stops with parents.” You can decide not to let your child have life-saving medical care in some instances, right. If it accords with your religious beliefs or other belief systems that are closely held like religious beliefs. So there are a lot of rhetorical responses to those kinds of arguments. But chief among them is just to rely really solidly on the scientific and medical evidence that we have that supports these interventions for trans people. And I think our opponents, not always on the right, but our opponents really make much ado of a few people who have detransitioned. And I think they really cherry pick those examples. And they also don’t contemplate that folks who detransition often end up re-transitioning again later in their life. Nor do they contemplate that the myriad reasons that people so-call detransition or pause their transition which is often a reflection of the society around them and the treatment they are experiencing that is making their life really unlivable even though they are trying to live authentically.

SARA: Yes. I’m glad you brought that up, that detransitioning isn’t even a thing I had heard much about until these last couple of years and these attacks on health care for trans youth. And it’s been so strange to watch how the opposition has really clung to that and the tiny, tiny – I think I had a guest just in the last interview I did who was something like “It’s like .02 percent of trans people.” It’s just such a tiny, tiny number.

CARL: Yeah.

SARA: I want to talk a little bit about the specifics of a particular case that I know many of us are following. The Skrmetti case that was just argued, oral arguments we just heard back in December at the Supreme Court where I want to shout out that the arguments were one of the attorneys arguing in favor of health care for trans youth, Chase Strangio of the ACLU, the first trans attorney to argue in front of the Supreme Court. So that had a particularly important moment in there. But that was a tough case to listen to. This is a case about the legality of healthcare for trans youth. And I heard that you got to be there in person and listen to the arguments. And I’m curious if you’ll share what that experience was like and what were some of the take-aways for you.

CARL: Yeah. Gosh. It was so incredible to be there both outside the courtroom where there were so many Mama Dragons present, which was great, and so many other advocates and parents, and trans people from across the country. The weather was frigid. I’m sure folks heard about that or saw it. I am admitted to the Supreme Court Bar, many attorneys can get admitted to the Supreme Court Bar. All you need is someone to sponsor you. And you need to fill out your application, submit your fee, and I was really honored to be admitted in the first group of about 30 trans attorneys admitted to the Supreme Court Bar through the National Trans Bar association back in 2022, November of 2022. That was a real honor for me. And I was there with many friends and colleagues . So there have now been, I think, 3 classes of 30 attorneys or more from the National Trans Bar Association. So we might be approaching 100 trans attorneys who are technically admitted to the Supreme Court Bar, which is just so amazing.

SARA: That’s amazing.

CARL: And so by virtue of my being admitted, we had a dedicated line for people who are admitted to the Supreme Court Bar. But, like the line for the public, you still have to wait outside. And so I decided to get to D.C. the day before the arguments, go scope out where our line would be, and then pack my supplies and figure out how early I wanted to get there the morning of. So I settled on getting there at about 2:30 in the morning. It was 20 degrees outside. A dear friend of mine who lives in D.C. met me there and she had brought hot coffee and snacks and sleeping bags and chairs. And we were joined over the subsequent hours by other friends from other organizations, several attorneys from Lambda, some folks from the ACLU who weren’t already guaranteed to be in the courtroom. And we waited outside until about 7am. Now the tricky part that some of your listeners may know but others may not that I’ll explain is, the Admitted Attorney line has a finite number of seats that are available to us. So it’s kind of a gamble. So as an aid type lawyer, very risk-averse, I do not like gambles, which was why I was contemplating how early I needed to get in line to ensure I was able to get in because you’re not guaranteed a seat. So the courtroom itself is very small. It looks kind of big and commanding. But once you’re actually seated, it’s really not that big. And so there are 78 seats reserved for admitted attorneys. But every day that there is an oral argument, the court admits more attorneys to the Supreme Court Bar. So however many attorneys are getting sworn in that day, that takes away from those 78 seats. So on the morning of the Skrmetti argument, for example, we learned that there were about 34 attorneys who were getting admitted and some of them also brought guests. You’re allowed one guest. And so some of them brought guests. And so basically, we were down that morning we learned, to roughly 38 seats, right. Take away 40 from 78, we’re down to about 38 seats. By 7 am, there were 75 people in line for the admitted attorney line. So not all of us were going to get in. One of the court security officers came out and told us that only the first 20 people in line were going to get to go in. I was number 5 in line. So I was able to get in. But the really low number of admitted attorneys who were able to go in was really disappointing to me because that line was almost all trans attorneys, almost entirely trans attorneys who were admitted to the Bar who wanted to be in listening to this historic moment. So that was really sad. I will say of the 20 of us who got in, those first 20, three quarters of us were trans attorneys. So that was really great. And I think that the reason it was so important for us to have as many trans folks in the courtroom as possible for me, from my view, is that Chase Strangio is having this incredibly historic moment as the first openly trans lawyer to argue before the high court. There may have been trans oralists before, but they are lost to antiquity to us. They are lost to history. So trans people being in front of the court is just an incredible historic moment. And so we wanted to also be there in the room, to not only support Chase, but to also bear witness, is the best thing I can say. So we finally got in. We had to sit there for an hour before arguments began. We got to listen to Elizabeth Prelogar for the Solicitor General, argue. She did a great job. And then Chase was supposed to be only allotted 15 minutes, but fortunately he got almost as much time as Elizabeth. He got about 45 minutes himself. And then we had to sit through Tennessee’s Attorney General arguing which was frustrating. But some things that stood out to me sitting there was looking around, seeing many familiar faces, seeing many other trans people in the courtroom, trans youth, their parents, trans journalists, there were lots of folks in the room watching that historic moment. The three big take-aways I have – look I’m not going to sugar coat it – the questions and some of the comments from the conservative justices were not particularly surprising. In particular, I mean, Justice Allito, Justice Thomas, even Justice Cavanaugh who brought up the specter of women’s sports, right, where it has zero relations to medical care in this context. But he sure found a way to bring it up anyway. Those comments and questions were really predictable and did not surprise Miss Prelogar or Mister Strangio. What was really remarkable to me were three things. One, Justice Sotomayor, in her comments, a couple of key points underscored what appeared to me, and I think many others who heard her, her really deep understanding and empathy for the humanity of trans people, and particular in this instance trans young people, trans adolescents. It was clear she had really read and understood what the clients in this case had gone through. That one of the young people experienced dysphoria in such a way that he did not want to speak for fear of hearing his own voice. And Justice Sotomayor, the conviction in which she talked about that, conveyed to me that she really had an understanding of trans people that had really developed since I listened to her comments at the Bostock oral argument in 2020 where she sort of fumbled with the terminology a little bit and got the global concepts. But here, she was really grappling with the humanity of trans people and what was at stake. Another thing that stood out to me was Justice Elena Kagan and the ease with which she maneuvered and communicated about – she used the words trans and cis like I do, like talking about, “I turned the light switch on.” It was as easy for her as some of the most basic communication. And that also sent a message to me, distinct from her questions and comments at the Bostock argument four years ago. She has developed in her understanding of trans people both as a legal concept – which is incredibly important, right – and I don’t know, maybe she has trans people in her inner circle. She just seems so comfortable. And she really had a grasp of the issues, right. She raised a question about trans-status, whether the advocates were arguing that trans status should be considered by the court in its conception of the arguments in front of it. And that’s really a tier up in the level of contemplation of the legal concepts involved, right. So she was signaling that to us. And then, last, but certainly not least, was Justice Jackson’s comments where she really – I think – wouldn’t let the court turn away from the connection between the equal protection rights of trans people to be included in the prohibitions of sex discrimination. When a law, on its face, discriminates against people based on sex as this law in Skrmetti does, the court reviews it with a higher level of scrutiny. And that’s what should happen here. And she made the connection to this situation, this case, this issue, to that of Loving V Virginia, of inter-racial marriage. Now, I think she did that for two reasons. One, she did that to call Justice Thomas’s attention to it because he has previously made remarks that that’s a decision that he thinks should be overturned or reversed, which is… we don’t even have time to get into today why that is so troubling. But she did that to respond and rebuke his arguments there. And to really not let the court turn away from the seriousness of this inquiry, which is, if they are not going to properly apply intermediate scrutiny to a law that so clearly discriminates on its face, then what is the 14th amendment even for, right. Because what was being asked of the Justices in the Loving V Virginia case about the right to marry someone of a “So-called” different race than you and the right to access medical care, right, both bodily rights, both legally, distinct legal concepts. But she really drove home the importance of this amendment and of the rights therein. And its historic principles stemming from the civil rights movement. And I thought that was just such an incredible thing that she did. I mean, it doesn’t surprise me because she’s brilliant and makes sense, and she’s right. But those are really the things that stood out to me as I listened to the argument which was almost 2 ½ hours long.

SARA: Yeah. Hers was a very powerful argument, and very inspiring. And I think it was good for those of us listening to hear it and hear that level of support. Can you help us understand potential outcomes and impact? And I know it’s really hard for a lawyer to do some of that guess work when the decision hasn’t even come out yet. But I know that there are a lot of parents, like myself, with trans youth who are watching with deep concern and may or may not understand what the impact would be if the court say, finds for the State of Tennessee and not on behalf of the family.

CARL: Sure. The practical implications are concerning, right. It would allow laws like those in Tennessee and Kentucky and in 24 other states, 25 other states across the country that are in various stages of being challenged or are on pause. Essentially the court could say, one possible outcome is that these laws pass muster under the Equal Protection Clause, right, of the 14th Amendment. And that wouldn’t immediately resolve all of the lawsuits that are happening right now. It wouldn’t be at the snap of their fingers. So when the decision comes out in late, late June or more likely early July of this year, those laws will not all immediately go into effect. However, the parties litigating those cases will have to grapple with whatever the court says about it. So if the court does say, “This is not about sex. Tennessee’s law, Kentucky’s law do not discriminate on the basis of sex, they discriminate on the basis of medical procedure” as the lawyer from Tennessee argued. That would give a really compelling and really unfortunately clear directive in some of those other cases for the states defending those laws that they are enforceable, right. And the advocates on the other side on behalf of families and trans young people, and in some cases trans adults, would have a really hard time with that if that were the outcome. Other possible outcomes include: the court could recognize very narrowly that this does implicate the Equal Protection Clause and therefore this law should’ve been analyzed by the Sixth Circuit and the District Court. It was analyzed by the District Court appropriately under intermediate scrutiny. But it should’ve been analyzed by the Sixth Circuit in accordance with intermediate scrutiny which really would not have allowed the law to continue, right, if they had applied the appropriate level of review. The court could say very narrowly, “We’re sending this back to the Sixth Circuit for a decision that is consistent with our other rulings about laws that implicate sex and discriminate on the basis of sex.” And then the Sixth Circuit would have to release a decision based on that directive. And then we’d have to see what the Sixth Circuit said about it, right, and how they responded to the directive to reverse and redo their decision. And that, again, not going to have an immediate effect on all these other folks, and all these other states challenging various bans because it, again – you’re sensing a theme here – our legal system just takes time. And that is probably the most frustrating part of it, is that things just take time. And sometimes that is good. We want things to move slowly because the gears of justice sometimes turn more effectively if they’re not rushed. But it will take time for that to play out at the appellate court level. And really, another possible outcome that we’re all hoping will be the outcome is that we will win, unequivocally we will win. And the court will say, “Not only was the Sixth Circuit wrong, but all these other states purporting to enact this kind of legislation are also in error. And laws like this which clearly discriminate on the basis of sex in their application and in the very text of the law do not pass muster.” So those are the possible outcomes. I think it is incredibly reasonable for people to be concerned, to be watching. But I think similar to what we’re encouraging folks to do right now in the first few days of the Trump Administration, if you’ve got young people to support and care for, they are watching you. And I’m not saying parents need to be perfect. But the more calm and assuring and encouraging that you can stay with your young people, I promise you that will be beneficial to them and to you because nothing is going to happen immediately, and we – and you – are not going to stop fighting for what is right to protect trans people, trans young people, trans adults. No matter what the Supreme Court says, our fight will never be over and it won’t certainly be over in July.

SARA: That’s right. Thank you for that reminder. We need them every day, it feels like.

CARL: Yes.

SARA: Carl, I’m really curious to hear more about how you became involved in this work and your career has really been primarily focused on equal rights and protections for the LGBTQ+ community. So tell us a little bit about your story?

CARL: Sure, yeah. Like I mentioned earlier, I’m from Colorado. I got my undergraduate degree from the University of Northern Colorado and thought that I was going to be a teacher. I had a lot of great teachers growing up, a lot of great coaches, and that seemed like a really honorable profession to me. And turns out, it is. There are so many wonderful educators across the country doing some of the most important work every day for young people. And I really respect and lift up the work that they do. My younger sister is an elementary school teacher in Oklahoma, which is a really hard place to be a public school teacher right now. And she’s really doing the Lord’s work and I’m really proud of her. And so anyway, I went to school to be a teacher and found that as I was out, not in a blow horn kind of way, but I was a visibly queer educator. I had not yet come out as trans. But I was openly queer and so, at a couple of schools, was helping to run our Gay Straight Alliance – or Rainbow Alliance. It’s called different things in different states – and I was finding that in my classrooms, I could ensure the safety of my LGBTQ students. We could enact classroom rules and policies. And the school itself could have great policies. And then the kids went out into the world and experienced what a lot of LGBTQ young people experience. And granted, this was in the early 2000s. So fortunately a lot has changed. I think acceptance for LGBTQ youth in particular has changed significantly since that time. However, unfortunately, sometimes, some places it’s still true that LGBTQ youth are experiencing discrimination. And so I knew I wanted to go to graduate school and I thought that the kind of graduate degree that would help me help others the most would be a law degree. So I started law school at the University of Denver, which is one of two law schools in Colorado. And after my first semester of law school, I came out as trans. And Colorado in 2010 was a very different place than it is in 2025. It was really still very purple-y in its politics. As an LGBTQ person you were pretty okay in the big cities like Denver or Fort Collins, college towns. But places where I’m from, Colorado Springs, not so much. A lot of military presence, a lot of really conservative people in the more rural areas in the state. And so I was really worried about how my peers would react to me coming out as trans. And I didn’t really know a lot of trans people when I came out. But I knew it was the right thing for me to do. And I was really encouraged and impressed by the reactions of my peers, of my professors, of the administration at the University of Denver. People were really supportive. And I had a generally great experience. But, as I started to learn more about the community I was now a part of, I started to understand the real challenges that trans people faced for legal recognition, for basic rights, for consistent employment, for access to good health care and doctors who will just treat them like they treat their other patients with dignity and respect. And as I came to understand that on a personal level, I felt really driven to pursue this work as a professional. And so I was really honored that my first job out of law school was a Skadden Fellowship with the ACLU LGBT Project which is where Chase Strangio is now the co-legal director which is so amazing and incredible. And I got to work with him for a couple of years before charting my course over to Lambda. So it has been an incredible honor to do this work on behalf of trans people. Sorry, I find myself getting a little emotional, and that’s okay. But it is so incredible to do this work and to fight for trans young people and their loving and accepting parents and for trans parents and for trans adults and for trans people who are disabled and incarcerated and trans people who are immigrants. That has all been a part of the work I’ve been able to contribute to. And so I just feel so fortunate to be able to do it.

SARA: Thank you. I got a little emotional too. It feeds my own spirit to watch trans professionals in the world fighting on behalf of the trans community. And there’s something really beautiful when I get to turn to my daughter and say, “Look at this person. Look at this amazing role model not only just doing extraordinary work in the world, but also really fighting on behalf of the community.” I think it’s extraordinary. So thank you for that. Thank you on behalf of all of us, Thank you.

CARL: Thanks, Reverend Sara. Thank you.

SARA: I am curious what gives you hope in this fight right now despite all of the many challenges?

CARL: So much. I don’t have a lot of free time. But when I do, I really try to prioritize reading about trans people in history, and trans people now. But it has been really grounding for me to look back and to learn about our history and to learn about the people who were making a way when there was no way, when no one had done it before them. I think about, in particular, Lou Sullivan, who was a trans man in the 70’s and early 80’s who started an F to M magazine that was sent all over the United States and in fact around the world with news and information and art. And he really started connecting trans masculine and trans men to one another in a way that no one had before. And he just did it because he thought it was important to do. And he didn’t, assuredly there were not the formalized legal protections or access to medical care. He fought with doctors until he died about getting access to care. And very tragically, he died young of complications related to HIV because he was a gay trans man and he very famously said that “They wouldn’t treat me like a gay man in my life, but I’m going to die like one.” And he loved and cared for so many trans people in his world and around the world. And that is a real model to me. I think what brings us hope is something that Chase talked about on the steps outside the Supreme Court when he came out from the oral argument was the connection we all have to one another and to the love and care that we are also invested in sharing with each other and protecting one another, that really is what gives me hope. And I think knowing that, for myself, no matter what happens, I am not giving up. No matter what happens, you are not giving up. No matter what happens, your listeners are not going to stop loving and caring for their children. And I’ll be honest, there may be some really difficult and challenging days ahead of us all. But I think that our commitment to our shared humanity and our love for one another is what will sustain us through those days. And I think that commitment is really what brings me a lot of hope. I also really try to take breaks.

SARA: Good. I’m glad to hear that.

CARL: Yes. Yes. One of my favorite movies that I watch sometimes when I feel sad is a movie called Pride. It came out in 2014 and it’s about an organization in the UK called Lesbians and Gays Support the Miners. And it’s a true story. Right smack dab in the middle of the beginning f the AIDS crisis in the UK, this activist group of mostly lesbians and gays, no trans people that we knew of – but I’m sure they were there – decided to start supporting the striking miners in the UK, the coal miners who were striking for better wages and all kinds of things. And it’s about the shared struggle and how that can be so deeply enriching both for our own struggle and our ability to make gains in all areas of justice work. So, yes, that movie makes me feel good. It’s a very funny and feel good movie. But it’s a true story about how, when we link arms with one another in our own struggle but also with those who are struggling in other areas, right, with folks in our immigrant communities who are being once again targeted, with folks in our scientific and medical communities who are being targeted, we sure do stand a better chance of staying together, of resisting our opposition. So I think that’s another thing that really gives me hope.

SARA: I love that.

CARL: Yeah. Those are the things that keep me going.

SARA: I love that. And I want to make sure – we’ll put some links to the movie, but also a link to Lou Sullivan because I think that’ll be of interest for some folks, too. And it’s such a good message right now to remember that this work for equality and rights is interconnected with every other issue out there. So however we’re showing up and whatever ways we’re showing up in space with people, particularly those who are directly targeted, it matters. And I’m excited. I’m going to go watch that movie.

CARL: Please do. It’s so good. It’s so great. There are hard moments, but there’s a line in that movie where the lead organizer for the striking miners and the lead organizer for the lesbian and gay group, they’re hugging, they’re embracing after a setback. And the guy who is in charge of the miners, he says, “Don’t give it all to the fight. Save some for home.” And that’s what I wanted to really drive home for folks is the fight, it will take all of it from us if we let it. But you have to save some for home. Like I have to go take breaks and snuggle my dogs and hug my husband and go for walks and do things that bring me joy like watching that film and playing sports, moving my body.

SARA: That is a powerful message. You just answered my next question which was really what’s the message you’d like to leave with trans folks and families who are really feeling scared or uncertain, but that feels like a perfect one.

CARL: Yeah. Don’t give it all to the fight. Save some for home. If we’re not nourishing ourselves, if we’re not finding love and joy, we’re not going to be able to go out into the world and take on those really hard things. And I think that it is so important – really now more than ever – that we think about things and ways that bring us joy. One last plug I’ll do is, I love to exercise. That is a really good stress reliever for me. But I was reading an article that was like, “You should add in some somatic movement to your exercise.” I’m like, “I’m going to lift weights and I’m going to run, and these things that are stressful on my body.” But I read this article and now I’m working in dance routines into my weekly exercise. And Reverend Sara, it has been so excellent to have 30 minutes where I just go do a dance routine along with a trainer to some fun music and just laugh. And I’m in my basement or in my living room and it seems silly. I know it will sound silly to some people. But I really cannot underscore enough how important it is to save some for home. Find the joy in your family, in your young person, in your friends, in your community, and plug into those things. Because that is really what’s going to make our external work continue to be sustainable.

SARA: I love a good dance party. I think that’s fantastic. And it is, it does something different than just regular exercise. And as you’re talking and I’m thinking about save some for home and don’t give it all to the fight, I also hear a lot of, in this moment, maybe this time around, I’ve been thinking a lot about give it to community, give it to each other, save some for each other. That is as much a part of the fight, is caring for each other, holding each other up, dance partying together, whatever that looks like. That’s just maybe even more critical than the public opposition.

CARL: It really is. It really is. Building community right now, I’m in full agreement with you. I’m not sure that there’s anything more important than that. Not letting ourselves get siloed or feel alone. We are not. But we have to invest. We have to show up. We have to be present. We have to make that effort to connect with others and build that community because that’s what will sustain us and get us through. You’re totally right.

SARA: Yeah. So I like to end my interviews with the same questions for every guest. This has been a really beautiful conversation and I’m so grateful for your time. And the first question that I have, the first of the last, is about the Mama Dragons name. So the Mama Dragon’s name came about out of a sense of fierceness and fierce protection for our kids. And so I like to ask my guests, what are you fierce about?

CARL: I am really fierce about trans people’s right to thrive in this world, not just survive, but thrive. We belong here. And we are entitled to thrive just like everyone else.

SARA: That’s right. And your work clearly shows that. The last question that I have and ending on a good note right around the same messages that we’ve just been talking about, which is what is bringing you joy right now? Besides dance party?

CARL: Yeah. Dance parties doing it. I’m a big dog enthusiast. I have two rescue pups that I never get tired of seeing the same goofy looks on their faces or taking them for walks. I’m really enjoying being connected here in Atlanta to local trans advocacy efforts. We had a big rally down at the capitol two weeks ago. And we had such an incredible turnout. People showed up and, again, very cold weather, folks from PFLAG, and Southern Poverty Law Center, and HRC, and from all over the state to stand up and show up for trans people at the capitol on the first day of the session. That was really joyful for me. We did chants and sang songs. And I know a lot of my answers are coming back to my work. But as you’re seeing, that’s a big part of who I am and what I do. But that all brings me a lot of joy. I think the other thing I will add is music and art, feeling connected to people in the shared struggle through great art and music. I’ll do one last plug for my friend Chase, he’s in a documentary that’s currently premiering at Sundance, while we’re talking right now which is so cool. And folks can view that if they’d like to. You can go to the Sundance website and buy a virtual ticket. It is $35 and then you can stream the film. It’s called “Heightened Scrutiny.” So maybe we can put a link in the show notes for that as well.

SARA: You bet.

CARL: Trans people are doing such cool things in so many different ways around the United States and across the world. So I’m always looking for ways to plug in and feel encouraged about the things that we are doing to find joy, not just to fight. The fight is good and we will continue doing it. But there are so many things that people are creating and building and I love learning about that and supporting that.

SARA: That’s excellent. Thank you. Thank you, Carl, for your time and for your work and passion and dedication. This conversation has been wonderful and amazing and also really motivating and inspiring. Thank you for your wisdom.

CARL: Thank you so much, Reverend Sara. And thanks to the Mama Dragon community for all the work you all do. And I very much mean the love and support that you show your children and those in your community. It is critical and crucial and I am grateful for it.

SARA: Thank you. Thanks so much for joining us here In The Den. Did you know that Mama Dragons also offers an eLearning program called Parachute? This is an interactive learning platform where you can learn more about how to affirm, support, and celebrate the LGBTQ+ people in your life. Learn more at mamadragons.org/parachute. Or find the link in the episode show notes under links.

If you enjoyed this episode, we hope you’ll take a moment to tell your friends and leave us a positive rating and review wherever it is you listen. Good reviews make us more visible and help us reach more folks who could benefit from being part of this community. And if you’d like to help Mama Dragons in our mission to support, educate, and empower the parents of LGBTQ+ children, please donate at mamadragons.org or click the donate link in the show notes. For more information on Mama Dragons and the podcast, you can follow us on Instagram or Facebook or visit our website, mamadragons.org.

 

 



People on this episode

Head Shot

Sara LaWall

Host
Head Shot

Jen Blair

Producer