Sexual and Reproductive Rights

General Overview

In the field of sexual and reproductive rights, we record the highest number of setbacks across the various rights monitored during this period, with a singular characteristic: several of the most profound deteriorations are not the result of major visible normative reforms but of the silent dismantlement of public policies, the defunding of programs, and institutional hollowing-out. This mode of regression — which advances without great publicity and without a formal legislative act that would make it more easily challengeable — is particularly damaging and difficult to reverse.

The Dismantlement of Care Policies

The report “La cocina de los cuidados” (“The Kitchen of Care”), produced by CELS with quarterly snapshots, offers the most systematic tracking of this process. In October 2024 — ten months into the administration — a survey of 49 care policies showed that 24 had been repealed or discontinued, and 18 were at risk or underimplemented: only 7 remained in force. By March 2025, the situation was even more complex: of 50 policies surveyed, only 5 remained standing — 90% had been cut, dismantled, repealed, or was at risk. The June 2025 report — eighteen months into the administration — found that only 4 of the 50 surveyed policies (8%) remained in force, and that 2,866,000 people had lost at least one care policy they had been beneficiaries of. The speed and depth of this dismantlement has no precedent in the recent history of Argentine social policy.

Sexual and Reproductive Health: Defunding and State Withdrawal

In April 2024, presidential spokesperson Manuel Adorni announced the “redesign” of the ENIA adolescent pregnancy prevention plan, which included the termination of contracts for 619 people — nearly 80% of the total workforce. A year later, official data confirmed that the distribution of condoms and contraceptives had fallen 64% under the Milei government compared to the previous period. This defunding also affected the procurement of supplies to guarantee access to legal abortion, rapid HIV diagnostic tests, viral load testing reagents, and prevention materials. The combination of these measures — the defunding of access to legal abortion and HIV health care, the drop in contraceptive distribution, and the dissolution of a team working at the federal level on adolescent pregnancy prevention — constitutes a first-order setback in the right to sexual and reproductive health.

Regressive International Positions

In November 2024, Argentina was the only country at the UN to vote against a resolution to eliminate and prevent violence against women. This position — recorded by MIDA as a threat, since it does not modify the domestic normative framework but constitutes a relevant political signal — fits within the Milei government’s strategy of using multilateral forums to project its conservative gender agenda internationally. In January 2025, at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Milei attacked the homosexual community and “gender ideology” in his speech — a declaration the president himself made as a representative of the Argentine State before a global audience.

General overview

The area of sexual and reproductive rights is the densest of the Brazilian period, both in the number of events and in the complexity of the picture it presents. The federal executive advanced significantly in LGBTQIA+ rights, in the fight against femicide, and in the construction of a National Care Policy. At the same time, Congress and actors within the judicial system — with support from the medical establishment — generated setbacks and threats that the government had to contest through the courts. This dynamic of simultaneous advance and resistance is the most characteristic feature of the Brazilian case with regard to this set of rights.

LGBTQIA+ rights, care, and the anti-femicide agenda

From the start of the period, the federal government maintained an active LGBTQIA+ rights agenda. In June 2024, the Acolher+, Empodera+, and Bem Viver+ programs were launched, with investment exceeding R$ 8 million, aimed at guaranteeing labor inclusion and shelters for LGBTQIA+ people living on the streets. On the same date, the government signed a technical cooperation agreement with Fundacentro for the implementation of Empodera+. Additionally, the National Council of Justice and the federal government signed an agreement to implement the Rogéria Form, an emergency registration system for LGBTQIA+ people at risk. In January 2025, the National Agenda for Combating Violence against LGBTQIA+ People was launched, with federal intersectoral actions. In February 2025, more than 21,000 people participated in state-level preparatory conferences for the 4th National LGBTQIA+ Conference, which was held in October of that year and was convened by presidential decree.

As stated on the Conference’s website: “In light of the current Federal Government’s commitment to social participation, a new Council for the Rights of LGBTQIA+ People was established by Decree No. 11,471, dated April 6, 2023 — the previous Council had been abolished by decree during the government of Jair Bolsonaro. Likewise — also as an expression of this commitment — the Federal Government convened the 4th National Conference on the Rights of LGBTQIA+ People by Decree No. 11,848, dated December 26, 2023, under the motto ‘Building the National Policy on the Rights of LGBTQIA+ People.'”

On the issue of gender-based violence, the government launched the national mobilization “Femicídio Zero” in August 2024, with cumulative investments of R$ 389 million since 2023 for protection shelters and care services for women in situations of violence. In October 2024, Lula enacted a law that raised the penalty for femicide to a minimum of 20 and a maximum of 40 years in prison, established femicide as a specific offense with its own article to facilitate statistical identification, and incorporated important aggravating circumstances, including disqualification from holding public office for those convicted of serious crimes against women. In February 2025, the Supreme Federal Court extended the urgent protective measures of the Maria da Penha Law — named in honor of Maria da Penha Fernandes, the woman who sought justice for two attempted murders at the hands of her partner — to travesti and transsexual women.

In December 2024, Lula enacted the National Care Policy — developed by more than 20 ministries and approved almost unanimously in Congress — the first normative framework in Brazil to recognize care as a human right and establish co-responsibility among the State, the market, families, and communities. That same month, the National Council for the Rights of Children and Adolescents (CONANDA) approved Resolution 258/2024, establishing humanized care protocols for girls and adolescents who are victims of sexual violence, guaranteeing their access to legal abortion. In March 2025, a São Paulo court issued an unprecedented ruling recognizing “stealthing” — the removal of a condom without consent — as sexual violence analogous to rape, enabling access to legal abortion in such cases.

The Supreme Federal Court: a key actor in the defense of rights

The STF acted during the period as a significant defensive actor against attempts at regression. In June 2024, it unanimously affirmed that trans people have access to all treatments available through the Unified Health System (SUS), making binding a ruling that had been issued in 2021. That same month, the full bench of the STF decided, within the framework of Direct Action of Unconstitutionality 5668, that public and private schools are obligated to combat discrimination based on gender, gender identity, and sexual orientation, including sexist and homo-lesbo-transphobic bullying. STF Justice Alexandre de Moraes also suspended the resolution of the Federal Council of Medicine that sought to restrict legal abortion in cases of rape beyond 22 weeks of pregnancy.

Setbacks and threats from Congress and the medical establishment

Against this backdrop of advances, the Bolsonarist opposition and conservative sectors of the institutional system sought to generate setbacks and threats. On June 12, 2024, the Chamber of Deputies approved — under an urgency procedure, in a session lasting just 23 seconds — Bill 1904/2024, which equated abortion from week 22 onwards with simple homicide, with penalties of up to 20 years in prison, even in cases of pregnancies resulting from rape. The bill was never implemented: the Federal Council of the Brazilian Bar Association declared it unconstitutional by acclamation, and the social mobilization was immediate and massive. In December 2024, CONANDA Resolution 258/2024 on legal abortion for child rape victims was suspended by order of a federal judge at the request of Senator Damares Alves — a former Bolsonaro minister — although the suspension was judicially reversed in January 2025.

In the area of trans rights, the Federal Council of Medicine approved a resolution in April 2025 prohibiting the use of puberty blockers and hormone therapies for minors under 18, and establishing that gender-affirming surgeries may only be performed from age 21 onwards — a measure that runs in diametrically opposite direction to international standards in trans healthcare, and which comes from a corporate actor with normative power over medical practice. In June 2025, two bills introduced in the Senate sought to reserve bathrooms exclusively for cisgender women and restrict the participation of trans people in women’s sports, part of a broader trend: in the first half of 2025, the Senate accumulated five anti-LGBTQIA+ bills.

Civil society resistance

The response of civil society was active and articulate. In June 2024, mass demonstrations took place in São Paulo, Rio de Janeiro, and other cities against Bill 1904/2024. On June 15, thousands of people protested in Rio de Janeiro, São Paulo, and Brasília under the banner of rejecting the equation of abortion with homicide. In March 2025, thousands of women marched in the country’s main cities on International Women’s Day, against femicide, for the decriminalization of abortion, and for more resources for gender policies, in a context of record femicide figures in 2024.

As relevant context, an official report from August 2024 on the eighteen years of the Maria da Penha Law noted that legislative advances have not been able to reverse the increase in violence. In 2023, assaults against women in the country increased by 9.8%, reaching 258,941 reported cases. The number of women threatened grew by 16.5%, with 778,921 cases recorded, while incidents of psychological violence surged by 33.8%, totaling 38,507 cases. This gap between the normative framework and the reality experienced by women is an important indicator of the limits of institutional progress.

General overview

The area of sexual and reproductive rights presents substantive events of a favorable nature: the abortion reform recommendation drawn up by the Commission on Reproductive Self-Determination (April 2024), the de-pathologization involved in the recognition of trans identities (October 2024), and the passage of the Violence Assistance Act (February 2025). These milestones coexist with legislative inaction on abortion reform, which remains unresolved. The resulting balance is complex: concrete normative advances on gender-based violence and gender identity stand in contrast with the persistence of an abortion legal framework considered anachronistic in the European context.

Recommendation for abortion reform

In April 2024, the German government made public the conclusions of the Commission on Reproductive Self-Determination and Reproductive Medicine, a body created with the mandate of evaluating the country’s abortion regulations and formulating recommendations for their modernization. The Commission concluded that the existing regulations did not meet international human rights standards or public health guidelines, and that they were out of step with common practice across Europe. Within the MIDA framework, this conclusion is recorded as a defense: it does not entail an immediate normative change, but it does constitute an institutional action aimed at strengthening already recognized rights and laying the groundwork for their reform.

Tensions in Parliament: the recommendation is not law

In February 2025, despite the recommendations of the expert Commission, the Bundestag’s Legal Affairs Committee decided not to advance any proposal to reform abortion legislation. Abortion remains legal in Germany, but the Criminal Code still classifies it as a crime, specifying that in certain cases it will not be punishable — a legal contradiction that, according to the main reproductive rights organizations, perpetuates stigma and affects effective access to the right. Within the MIDA framework, this event is recorded as continuity: it does not entail a regressive modification of the normative framework, but it does represent the forfeiture of a concrete opportunity for progress.

New gender identity law

In October 2024, Germany brought into force new legislation allowing individuals over the age of 18 to change their name and gender marker in official records through an administrative procedure, without the need for psychiatric evaluations or judicial hearings — requirements that had been criticized for decades by human rights organizations and the trans community. Minors between the ages of 14 and 18 may access this right with parental approval or through legal recourse. This reform represents a concrete and significant step forward, running counter to the policies adopted during the same period of analysis by countries such as the United States under the Trump administration.

Violence Assistance Act

On February 14, 2025, the Bundestag and the Bundesrat — Germany’s constitutional body representing the 16 federal states, acting as the upper chamber in the legislative process — passed the Violence Assistance Act (Gewalthilfegesetz), which entered into force on February 28, 2025. This measure is unprecedented in nature: it establishes a nationwide right to protection and assistance for women affected by violence. The law obliges both federal and state governments to guarantee a comprehensive, needs-based support system: women’s shelters and specialized counseling centers are now co-funded by the federal government, an obligation that had not previously existed in law. This advance is especially significant in the regional context: while in other countries monitored by MIDA protection against gender-based violence is under attack or being defunded, Germany formalizes and reinforces by law the right to assistance. Its passage by both chambers — and with the support of the new CDU/CSU–SPD coalition — indicates that it represents a broad political consensus, not a measure of the outgoing government.

General Overview

The area of sexual and reproductive rights in Spain shows a positive balance in terms of executive measures and Constitutional Court rulings, contrasted with implementation deficits that affect the effective exercise of those rights across much of the territory. The Sánchez government accumulated advances during the period in LGBTIQ+ rights, in protection against gender-based violence, and in safeguarding the right to abortion. At the same time, the normative violations documented by human rights organizations reveal that the progressive agenda of the central executive encounters resistance in regional administrations and health institutions.

The Right to Abortion and LGBTIQ+ Rights

In September 2024, the Constitutional Court dismissed the unconstitutionality appeals filed by the PP and Vox against the 2023 Abortion Law reform, securing the right of 16- and 17-year-olds to have abortions without parental permission and eliminating the mandatory reflection period. This ruling closed a multi-year legal battle and consolidated a normative framework that the right-wing opposition had sought to reverse. In June 2024, the government filed unconstitutionality appeals against reforms to the Trans and LGBTI laws of the Community of Madrid, challenging articles involving conversion therapies, the pathologization of trans minors, and the exclusion of LGBTI organizations as interested parties in criminal or administrative sanctioning proceedings. In September 2024, Royal Decree 1026/2024 came into force, stipulating that companies with more than 50 employees must have protocols against LGBTI discrimination.

Protection Against Gender-Based Violence: Normative Advances and Implementation Gaps

In July 2024, Spain voted in favor of Resolution A/HRC/56/L.25/Rev.1 on the elimination of discrimination against women and girls at the UN Human Rights Council. In February 2025, the government renewed the State Pact against gender-based violence with a larger budget for 24-hour crisis centers for victims of sexual violence. In March 2025, the Council of Ministers approved the draft Organic Law on measures regarding vicarious violence — violence exercised against children to harm their mother — criminalizing it as an autonomous offense with sentences of six months to three years in prison.

But beyond the progressive character of the law itself, public statements, and budget allocations to sustain public policies, effective access to rights was at times obstructed. In December 2024, an Amnesty International report noted that only five autonomous communities had implemented the conscientious objector registry for abortion provision — a mechanism included in the 2023 reform which, in the absence of such a registry, allows undeclared conscientious objection to obstruct access to abortion in the public health system in practice. The contextual fact accompanying this finding — that the majority of abortions in Spain take place in private institutions — points to a structural failing of the public health system in guaranteeing this right effectively.

General Overview

No other set of rights concentrated as much regressive activity during the period under analysis as sexual and reproductive rights. With 28 recorded events — including setbacks, threats, defenses, and forms of resistance — this area constitutes one of the key nodes of the Trump administration’s agenda and, at the same time, the field in which civil society responded most actively during the period under analysis.

The Biden administration closed its tenure with positive signals in this area: in November 2024, seven of the ten states that put abortion rights to a referendum — including Arizona, Colorado, Maryland, Missouri, Montana, New York, and Nevada — voted in favor of constitutional enshrinement. The Supreme Court that same year rejected an attempt to restrict access to mifepristone, one of the medications used to guarantee safe abortion. In June 2024, Biden granted pardons to veterans convicted of “sodomy” offenses under the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

With Trump’s arrival, this landscape shifted dramatically and systematically from the very first day of his administration.

Biden Administration (June 2024 – January 2025)

Advances

The final phase of the Biden administration recorded significant advances in LGBTQ+ and reproductive rights. In June 2024, pardons were granted to veterans who had been prosecuted for homosexual conduct under legislation now repealed. In November 2024, the results of referendums in seven states represented a historic advance for abortion rights at the subnational constitutional level, in a national context marked by the reversal of Roe v. Wade. The Supreme Court also dismissed in June 2024 a lawsuit seeking to restrict access to mifepristone.

Trump Administration (January – June 2025)

LGBTQ+ Rights: An Unprecedented Normative Offensive

On January 20, 2025, hours after taking office, Trump signed Executive Order 14168 “Defending Women from Gender Ideology,” which officially defines only two sexes — male and female — determined at birth. This measure was the starting point of a chain of executive orders that included:

• The suspension of passports with X gender markers or those not matching the sex assigned at birth (January 22 and February 21, 2025).
• The ban on transgender persons in the armed forces (January 27, 2025).
• The elimination of diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs in federal agencies (January 21, 2025).
• The restriction of access to gender-affirming care for those under 19 years of age through Executive Order 14187 (February 3, 2025).
• The ban on the participation of trans women in federally funded women’s sports (February 5, 2025).
• The revocation of Biden-era policies protecting LGBTQ+ people in education, housing, and immigration (February 22, 2025).
• The directive to review and withdraw funding from schools that promote content considered “gender ideology” (January 29, 2025).

This sequence of measures constitutes the most systematic dismantlement of LGBTQ+ rights at the federal level in recent American history.

Sexual and Reproductive Rights: Cuts, Restrictions, and Institutional Erasure

On sexual and reproductive health, the Trump administration simultaneously deployed multiple lines of action:

• Reinstatement of the “Global Gag Rule” (January 24), prohibiting U.S. funding to international organizations that inform or promote abortion using their own funds.
• Signing of an executive order to apply the Hyde Amendment and eliminate federal funding for abortion services (January 24).
• Removal of the ReproductiveRights.gov website, taken down on the day of inauguration.
• Order for the immediate halt of PEPFAR, the global HIV/AIDS program, with direct consequences in dozens of countries (January 20). Later modified to eliminate access to PrEP for anyone other than pregnant or breastfeeding women (February 1).
• Cuts of 20,000 employees from the Department of Health (HHS), eliminating a large part of the infrastructure for overseeing reproductive care.
• Elimination of government offices dedicated to reproductive health, HIV, maternal and child health, and research on assisted reproduction techniques.
• Freezing of approximately 35 million dollars in Title X program funds — a program dedicated to providing family planning and reproductive health services — affecting more than 840,000 patients (March 31).
• Withdrawal of the federal lawsuit seeking to guarantee emergency abortions under the EMTALA (Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act) (March 1).
• Request by Secretary Robert Kennedy Jr. for a full review of mifepristone by the FDA (May 6), in open contradiction with decades of scientific evidence.
• A federal judge overturned the reproductive privacy rule under HIPAA (the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act — the U.S. federal law establishing national standards to protect sensitive patient medical information from disclosure without consent) implemented in 2024 (June 18), eliminating safeguards on the use of data of patients seeking reproductive care.
• Cuts or elimination of programs that monitored maternal mortality, fertility outcomes, and reproductive health tracking (April 2025).

In parallel, the government systematically dismantled data, scientific guidelines, and digital public health resources on HIV, reproductive health, and LGBTQ+ rights — what organizations such as Interfaith Alliance characterized as “digital censorship” in service of a conservative ideological agenda.

Resistance and Defense

The response from civil society and the judiciary was significant, though in most cases it did not succeed in reversing the measures adopted:

• Nine organizations, including the San Francisco AIDS Foundation, filed a federal lawsuit against Trump challenging the executive orders on gender identity (February 20).
• The State of Minnesota filed a federal lawsuit to prevent the application of orders against trans persons, including the threat of withholding funds from schools (April 22).
• The ACLU filed a lawsuit on behalf of NFPRHA (National Family Planning and Reproductive Health Association) against the Department of Health for the unlawful withholding of Title X funds (April 24). The lawsuit was withdrawn in December 2025 following the gradual restoration of the funds.
• Mass mobilizations during Pride Month in June 2025 expressed the LGBTQ+ community’s rejection of the Trump administration’s policies.
• The Supreme Court unanimously rejected in June 2025 an attempt to restrict access to mifepristone, ruling that the anti-abortion plaintiffs lacked standing.