Trans Specific Dynamics

1. Fostering a Respectful Environment

For transgender survivors to safely access court systems, it is important that courts are proactive in respecting the identities and experiences of trans people and ensuring that everyone within the court does so as well. All survivors entering a courtroom should ideally feel confident that they will be respected. Respect includes being addressed using the correct name, pronouns, and honorifics; not being subjected to invasive, harmful questioning; and not having bias or misconceptions about their identity affect how the court treats them. Fostering a respectful environment towards transgender survivors requires providing transgender people the same respect that is given cisgender people when they share their names, when they object to invasive questioning, or when they otherwise ask the court for respect. During hearings, courts can take a variety of measures to ensure respect for transgender litigants, attorneys, witnesses, and other individuals:

(a) Use respectful forms of address

Judges and court personnel can take steps to ensure everyone uses respectful forms of address. Judges and court clerks can introduce themselves using their name and pronouns. Courts have significant power to not only respect individuals’ names and pronouns themselves, but to create norms within their courtrooms of how individuals will be respected. When judges introduce themselves using their pronouns, it can signal that the court understands the importance of addressing people how they wish to be addressed.

Judges can also ask individuals in court to introduce themselves and share their pronouns. For example, after a case is called, a judge might ask, “Can the parties please state their name and share their pronouns, if they wish?” or, “Can counsel please introduce both themselves and the parties using their name, and please state their pronouns if they wish to share them?” A judge might also ask each party, “How would you like to be addressed? For example, the court clerk is Mr. Patel.” If individuals choose not to share their pronouns, the court should avoid using pronouns or honorifics by using the role of the individual instead. For example, the judge might refer to “Counsel Smith” or “Plaintiff Graham.” This prevents judges from inadvertently making an error in addressing someone and potentially causing harm. It additionally signals to the attorneys and parties in the room that the court will not tolerate disrespectful forms of address.

Court clerks might also ask these questions when individuals file paperwork or when they check in for court hearings so that the judge has the information already available. However, there can be value in the judge setting the tone for everyone in the court by asking these questions. Finally, though terms like “sir” and “ma’am” are often used to signal respect, they often require an assumption about someone’s gender. Avoiding terms of address that assume gender promotes respect for individuals of all gender identities.

(b) Avoid making assumptions.

Judges should avoid making assumptions about the gender of individuals in their court. Asking about pronouns and terms of address helps prevent assumptions. Additionally, judges can avoid needing to make assumptions by always using gender-neutral terms like “spouse” or “parent” when they are not certain of someone’s gender, or when they do not know the terms a person prefers. Judges can also use “they” to refer to an individual whose gender the judge does not know.

(c) Use someone’s chosen name, even when different from their legal name.

Courts should also ensure that they are referring to individuals using the name that person uses. Some transgender people may use a name other than their legal name. Legal name and gender marker changes can be costly, time-consuming, and otherwise burdensome; many transgender people change their name socially, but do not change their name or gender marker on legal documentation. The name used by a person should be noted in court documentation, and all court personnel should be instructed to use the correct name.

(d) Enforce respect within the courtroom

Judges must also promote respect by preventing disparagement and harassment based on the survivor’s gender identity or gender expression. Judicial canons often require that judges ensure that court personnel, parties, witnesses, attorneys, and others do not discriminate or harass individuals based on gender identity, gender, and/or sex. This can include enforcing respect of a transgender survivor. Some ways to foster and enforce respect of transgender individuals in the courtroom include:

• Making sure that attorneys or parties do not misgender transgender survivors or use incorrect names for them.
• Preventing attorneys or parties from bringing up a transgender person’s gender identity when it is not relevant.
  • Gender identity is often not relevant to a legal case, and may be brought up by opposing parties to discredit a transgender survivor. If an attorney or party tries to bring up a person’s gender identity, consider if it is relevant to the case. If it is not relevant, then the attorney or party should be prohibited from discussing it.
• Not allowing attorneys or parties to rely on stereotypes or myths about transgender people.

Remember that if the court or another person makes a mistake, correct it, but do not dwell on it. Mistakes happen – simply correcting it and taking care to avoid the same mistake in the future – can go a long way to build trust. However, if a party, witness, attorney, or other individual intentionally misgenders or otherwise disrespects a transgender person based on their identity, this should be addressed directly and immediately. The court should direct the individual to refrain from the behavior.  For example, if an attorney misgenders a transgender survivor, the court might instruct the attorney, “Please refer to her as Ms. Smith, and use she/her pronouns when speaking about her.” Making the correction immediately and publicly can help to reiterate the standards of respect in the courtroom.

2. Training Needs

Transgender survivors can be harmed when courts are not trained on the experiences and needs of transgender communities. One way to improve the accessibility of courts for transgender survivors is for the court to receive regular training on addressing the needs of transgender witnesses, parties, and others in their courtrooms. Helpful topics include:

• Identities & terminology
• History of criminalization of transgender people and communities
• Experiences of transgender youth and adults with legal systems, with housing discrimination, employment discrimination, and other systemic harms
• Dynamics of abuse experienced by transgender survivors, including identity-based intimate partner violence
• Barriers to help-seeking and accessing legal systems
• The court’s obligation to prevent harassment and discrimination
• Best practices for making courts safer and more inclusive

While courts can take a variety of steps on their own to improve the fairness and safety of court processes for transgender survivors whose cases do make it to court, joint training with law enforcement and prosecutors’ offices can help to improve both the criminal legal process itself and community trust in the process. Pursuing joint training can be crucial for meaningfully addressing the needs of transgender survivors beyond those who are already accessing criminal legal systems. If transgender survivors do not report to law enforcement; if law enforcement does not respond safely and respectfully to transgender survivors; if cases with transgender victims are not prosecuted; then there will always be many transgender survivors who experience numerous barriers to court access.

However, even training just judges and court personnel can make a difference for transgender victims whose cases are being prosecuted, as well as transgender victims who bring civil cases. If courts are trained in respectful and inclusive court processes for transgender litigants, it can make experiences of choosing to engage with court systems a safer and more accessible option for a greater number of people.

3. Consider ways in which anti-transgender bias may affect the case and the survivor’s experiences

When a litigant is transgender, it is important to consider their experiences in the context of anti-transgender bias. Transgender people often have high rates of homelessness, financial instability, and interactions with juvenile justice systems, as well as regular experiences of discrimination in employment, housing, healthcare, and other areas of life.[xvii] These experiences lead to overcriminalization, meaning that many transgender survivors may have criminal histories, experience housing and financial instability, or have a history of substance use. As a result, transgender survivors may face bias not only based on their gender identity but based on these additional factors as well. When interacting with transgender litigants, it is important to be aware of and address biases within the court, including from court personnel, attorneys practicing in the court, and jurors. This can be particularly important to take into account when cases have transgender defendants, who are likely to be treated more harshly by the criminal system and during incarceration. Additionally, it is important to address these biases when addressing the credibility of a transgender survivor. Even a well-meaning factfinder may view the behavior of a transgender survivor more negatively than they would were that behavior exhibited by a cisgender survivor.

Additionally, when working with a transgender survivor of violence, consider whether anti-transgender hate played a role in the crime.[xviii] Twenty-seven percent of respondents to the 2015 US Transgender Survey indicated that they experienced acts of coercive control by an intimate partner that were related to them being transgender. This may include behaviors such as demeaning or mocking the survivor’s gender and presentation or withholding medication or medical care. The rates of these behaviors are experienced at higher rates by transgender women of color, with American Indian and multiracial women experiencing the highest rates.[xix] Courts should consider if and how anti-trans or anti-LGBTQ+ bias may have influenced the crime(s) the survivor experienced.  At the same time, it is important to not make assumptions about how someone’s gender identity played a role in their experiences; it is possible that the crime they experienced, and their resulting legal needs, are not related to their gender.

4. Community Outreach

Courts should consider reaching out to local transgender-specific and transgender-led advocacy organizations to better understand the needs of transgender survivors in their jurisdictions. Many organizations may offer training, or they may be able to offer guidance to the court. It is important to compensate organizations for their work; local transgender-specific organizations are likely to be smaller, without large funding reserves. Additionally, compensating local organizations messages that you value their work. Some areas may not have transgender-specific organizations; they may have an LGBTQ+ Community Center, or they may not have any services for LGBTQ+ people at all. In those instances, state or national transgender-specific organizations may be able to provide help with training, or they may be able to identify local individuals who can support courts.

Make sure the court’s informational materials and website are clear about how to access court systems. It is important that court websites clearly state how to file for protection orders, or engage in other court processes, especially those that survivors often navigate without an attorney. Language on court websites should be gender-neutral. Avoid referring to survivors using she/her pronouns and referring to perpetrators using he/him pronouns. Transgender survivors may feel that a legal option is not available to them or not safe for them to access if the language is gendered.

5. Consider Court Policies

Courts should have nondiscrimination policies in place for staff. In general, processes courts use to hire court personnel should be reviewed for potential bias. Hiring of individuals of all gender identities should be encouraged.  Employment policies should prevent and respond to discrimination against transgender employees, whether that discrimination comes from other court personnel or individuals accessing court systems. In general, if a court is not a safe and inclusive place for a transgender person to work, it is likely not safe for a transgender person to access as a litigant. Proactively including transgender community organizations and individuals in working groups, advisory councils, community committees, and other means of community input can also help to address barriers facing both staff and litigants.

Review written court rules and procedures for those attending court. Many courts still have antiquated dress codes that specify separate attire requirements based on gender (typically with only men and women as recognized options). This can leave transgender, nonbinary, and gender-nonconforming people unsure of the best way to dress for court. Dress codes that focus on the formality of attire, offer gender-neutral examples, and provide a list of options that a person can determine what is appropriate for them can help individuals feel more comfortable accessing courts.

Courts should review all court forms for inclusivity of transgender survivors. Ensure that language is inclusive of people of any gender identity and sexual orientation.  For example, make sure that language is not gendered. Rather than including fields such as “Husband” or “Wife,” use gender-neutral terms like “Spouse.”  Add optional fields to forms where individuals can identify the name and pronouns that they use. Determine if court forms are requesting information that is invasive or unnecessary for their purpose.

6. Identify & Enforce Protections

Courts should be aware of legal protections for transgender people.

One source of protection is nondiscrimination laws.[xx] Many states have laws that explicitly prohibit discrimination based on gender identity. Even where states do not explicitly protect transgender people from discrimination, some local ordinances offer protection.  At the federal level, in 2020, the Supreme Court has ruled that transgender people are protected from discrimination in employment,[xxi] concluding that discrimination based on gender identity is a form of discrimination based on sex. However, since 2025, significant federal actions, including executive orders, have attempted to challenge this ruling. Some courts, agencies, and other actors have interpreted that ruling to mean that in any context where discrimination based on sex is prohibited, discrimination based on gender identity is also prohibited. However, not all federal courts, agencies, and actors share this interpretation.

Even where there are no laws protecting transgender people from discrimination, courts can consider how their ethical obligations extend to preventing and addressing mistreatment of transgender people in court. For example, judicial canons often require that judges not manifest bias against people on the basis of sex, gender, sexual orientation, and/or gender identity. Many extend this requirement so that judges must require that all lawyers and court officers prevent such bias. Additionally, judicial canons often state that judges should uphold fairness or impartiality of the judiciary. Part of upholding this rule means ensuring that no group of people is subjected to additional burdens, unfair treatment, harassment, or discrimination when accessing court systems. Finally, ethical canons often have rules requiring judges to maintain decorum and to be courteous or respectful to all parties, witnesses, court officers, and others with whom they interact in court. This obligation, too, can be understood to mean that courts must treat transgender individuals with respect and ensure that others within the court do so as well.

Back to Top