The Center for American Progress (CAP) has introduced a new framework aimed at guiding political leaders in defending LGBTQ+ rights while acknowledging the complexities surrounding transgender participation in sports. This approach, outlined in the report “Ending the Backlash on LGBTQI+ Issues,” has sparked discussions within the LGBTQ+ community and beyond.
The report, authored by Caleb Smith, CAP’s director of LGBTQI+ health policy, and Winnie Stachelberg, a seasoned LGBTQ+ policy strategist, seeks to provide a clear and accessible way for leaders to address issues that have been saturated with misinformation by the political right. The goal is to “turn down the temperature” while “aggressively holding the line” on civil rights for transgender people and the broader LGBTQ+ community.
The Political Landscape and Polling Data
The report emphasizes that civil rights are inalienable and should not be influenced by shifting political powers or polling results. It calls for the passage of the Equality Act, condemns political interference in gender-affirming healthcare, and supports transgender people serving openly in the military. However, it also acknowledges the need to “reckon with the defensive environment” confronting the community.
Polling data from Gallup and Pew Research Center highlights the political pressure behind the report’s language. In, Gallup found that 69 percent of U.S. adults believed transgender athletes should compete only on teams matching their sex assigned at birth, while 24 percent supported participation based on gender identity. Among Democrats, 45 percent supported participation based on gender identity, down from 55 percent in 2026. Pew Research Center’s survey found similar results, with 66 percent favoring policies requiring transgender athletes to compete based on sex assigned at birth, yet 56 percent supporting protections for transgender people against discrimination in employment, housing, and public accommodations.
The Debate Over Transgender Athletes
The report’s most significant departure from many LGBTQ+ organizations’ positions is its discussion of transgender athletes. CAP argues that eligibility rules should be determined by schools, communities, and athletic governing bodies rather than elected officials. The authors cite the National Intramural-Recreational Sports Association (NIRSA), which allows participants to compete according to their gender identity, and the NCAA, which changed its policy after President Donald Trump‘s executive action targeting transgender athletes and now bars transgender women from competing on women’s teams.
“This is where these decisions appropriately lie: with sports’ governing bodies or schools themselves rather than with politicians,” the report states. “While local bodies and associations should minimize unnecessary exclusion, restrictions may be appropriate under some circumstances.” Smith declined to identify a specific policy CAP would endorse, emphasizing that these decisions should be made by sports associations and schools.
The NCAA Example and Its Implications
Smith included the NCAA in the report because it is a prominent governing body, not necessarily because CAP endorses its current rule. He noted that Trump’s intervention demonstrated precisely the political interference the report opposes. “We’re not necessarily speaking directly to their policy because we’re making the point that politics should not be part of the process,” Smith said. “We should not have politicians trying to interject themselves into school board meetings about sports policy.”
Alejandra Caraballo, a civil rights attorney and clinical instructor at Harvard Law School’s Cyberlaw Clinic, criticized the report’s approach. By presenting the NCAA rule as one legitimate outcome of institutional decision-making, she argued that CAP is normalizing a policy adopted under Trump administration pressure. “They’re essentially legitimizing a Trump-directed action,” Caraballo said. She also noted that the NCAA policy affects not only elite Division I competitors but also students in lower divisions who may play for exercise, friendship, and campus involvement.
Healthcare and Military Service: Drawing Harder Lines
Beyond sports, the report takes a firmer stance on healthcare and military service. It asserts that parents and physicians, not politicians, should make decisions about transgender medical care for minors. The report condemns bans on transgender military service and emphasizes that transgender veterans must retain the benefits they earned. Stachelberg stressed the importance of Democrats answering anti-transgender attacks rather than leaving a vacuum for their opponents to fill.
“One of the things to avoid is to say nothing,” she said. However, after addressing these attacks, leaders should connect LGBTQ+ equality to the economic pressures affecting millions of families, including housing, prescriptions, and medical bills. Republicans elevate transgender issues, she argued, because they would rather not discuss affordability or their governing record.
The report leaves unresolved the question of where legitimate athletic regulation ends and discrimination begins. Smith emphasized that CAP’s foundational principles are meant to prevent concessions from spreading to other areas of transgender life. “There are certain core freedoms that we believe are inherent to people,” he said, regardless of polling or “political machinations.” The disagreement now is whether CAP’s sports framework holds that line or begins moving it.
