We’ve known for some time that the rise of anti-trans politics in the Republican Party was likely an intentional tactic devised by political strategists in backrooms. But the recent events in Washington, D.C., and the eventual passage of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) bring the craven nature of those moves out into the light.

In the wake of same-sex marriage being legalized nationwide by the Supreme Court in 2015, Republicans needed another minority rights issue to get their base angry over. The growing mainstream awareness of trans people at the time played perfectly for those goals, and that move is evident in the escalation of anti-trans bills since 2015.

Related

The anti-trans movement is sadly going to outlive Trump’s presidency

Prior to the government shutdown at the end of September, the appropriations bills that conservatives in the Republican-controlled Congress were putting forward included a wealth of anti-trans riders. Six amendments were added to the 2026 NDAA, the $900 billion military funding bill, on September 10 that would have restricted gender-affirming care for service members and their families, banned trans women from sports, banned trans people from using the restroom at military facilities, removed gender identity questions from military surveys, and banned Pride flags.

While that speaks to a strong anti-trans sentiment, it appears that Republicans may have largely included them partially to satisfy the anti-trans extremists in the party and to represent something they could give up during deal-making with the Democrats.

Dive deeper every day

Join our newsletter for thought-provoking commentary that goes beyond the surface of LGBTQ+ issues
Subscribe to our Newsletter today

By the time the government was steaming towards a shutdown and stopgap bills, or continuing resolutions, were being considered, all of those anti-trans riders had evaporated. Republicans seemed ready to drop them as a way to push through other appropriations and to focus on ensuring Obamacare subsidies expired, forcing up healthcare prices for many Americans.

The big fear was that once the government was reopened, new appropriations bills would include all those anti-trans clauses. That fear was clearly well-founded.

The NDAA once again included a ban on Defense Department resources going towards gender-affirming surgeries, a ban on trans women taking part in “programs or activities at the military service academies that are designated for women or girls,” and other anti-diversity language.

But this past week, deal-making prior to the bill passing on Wednesday resulted in those anti-trans clauses being attenuated. The restrictions on gender-affirming healthcare were removed entirely, and the sports ban was altered to only affect those enrolled in the military academy, not visiting teams. That wasn’t a total win, but it was a big step in the right direction. We don’t know what they gave up to remove those anti-trans riders, but it seems the president and House Republicans might not be as deeply invested as they’d like us to believe.

What we do know, however, is what bargaining chip was handed over to at least one representative to secure a “yes” vote on the NDAA.

Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) heavily criticized the NDAA bill for its massive spending of taxpayer money in ways that wouldn’t actually help American citizens, tweeting, “These American People are $38 Trillion in debt, suffering from an affordability crisis, on the verge of a healthcare crisis, and credit card debt is at an all time high. Funding foreign aid and foreign wars is America Last and is beyond excuse anymore.”