Observational analysis reveals anti-trans judicial outcomes predict legislative growth and voting patterns across US states, suggesting systemic spillover across governmental branches.
We applied a social ecological model to examine whether judicial decisions denying trans plaintiffs’ claims in employment discrimination cases forecast anti-trans legislative growth, and in turn, Trump support and LGBT and trans geographic demography. That is, we explore associations between anti-trans actions in three branches of government. Specifically, we coded (a) a census of trans employment discrimination judicial case outcomes (N = 124) decided from 1974 to 2021, (b) the number of anti-trans bills each state introduced, (c) state electoral support for Trump, and (d) state LGBT population density and trans geographic relocation. Supporting hypotheses, states where judges disproportionately denied trans plaintiffs’ employment discrimination claims were more likely to introduce anti-trans legislation, which in turn, was associated with increased likelihood of state electoral support for Trump, lower state LGBT population density, and greater trans geographic relocation. Refuting the notion of an independent judiciary, judicial decisions in trans employment discrimination cases forecasted the drastic growth in anti-trans legislation, and in turn, executive branch outcomes. This research suggests that a social ecological theoretical model may offer a useful framework for understanding the influences and consequences of anti-trans legislation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Stevenson et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: