1. Under what circumstances should a transgender person be limited to using facilities designated for their sex assigned at birth (e.g. a trans woman required to use a men’s restroom or locker room)?

There are no circumstances under which a transgender person’s access to restrooms or locker rooms should be restricted based on their sex assigned at birth. Policies that seek to limit access are rooted in misinformation rather than evidence, and they undermine the dignity, safety, and inclusion of transgender individuals.

2. Do you support protecting medical providers’ right to prescribe gender affirming care to transgender patients under 18 years old?

Yes. For individuals who seek gender affirming care, it is essential that they receive it. A tremendous amount of harm can be caused when a young person is forced to undergo the wrong puberty for their gender identity. There are significant risks associated with delaying care until adulthood.

Medical providers should never fear that their safety or livelihood is in jeopardy because they are providing essential care to minors. Contrary to what the far right would have us believe, there is no evidence that medical providers are exerting unsolicited influence or pressure on cisgender youth to transition.

3. What limits, if any, should be placed on Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) initiatives in county government?

Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion initiatives are essential in county government, where decisions directly impact the daily lives of residents. When our policies reflect the full diversity of our community, we make better, more effective decisions. I do not support limiting DEI in ways that weaken representation or silence voices that have historically been excluded.

We are seeing a broader political effort, led by Donald Trump and others, to attack and dismantle DEI. That effort is not just misguided—it is dangerous. It threatens to roll back progress, divide communities, and make it harder for government to serve everyone effectively.

The only limits I would support are those that ensure DEI efforts remain focused on inclusion, fairness, and respect—not on amplifying hate or discrimination. If we are serious about building a community where everyone belongs, then continuing—and strengthening—DEI work is an essential step forward.

4. What restrictions should be placed on children’s content (books, videos, etc.) that refers to LGBTQ+ identities?

LGBTQ+ identities should be represented across all stages of learning. Children are exposed to content that reflects cisgender identities and heterosexual relationships in their daily lives, so there should be no additional restrictions placed on LGBTQ+ content that wouldn’t apply to others.

When I represented Howard County in the Maryland legislature, this principle guided my work to update curriculum requirements to ensure that gender identity and sexual orientation are included in the Comprehensive Health Education Framework. When I saw efforts in places like Carroll County to erase LGBTQ+ people from curricula, it reinforced the need for clear, inclusive standards and I fought for and passed legislation mandating an inclusive curriculum.

We also continue to face a serious bullying challenge in Howard County schools. Inclusive, age-appropriate representation helps foster understanding, respect, and safer environments for all students.

5. What proof, if any, should a person transitioning from one gender to another need to in order to change government issued documents? Are there any circumstances when this should be forbidden?

There are no circumstances under which this should be forbidden. While counties do not set the requirements for state-issued identification, they do issue and manage certain official records. For those documents, the process should be straightforward, respectful, and accessible.

In most cases, a simple, standardized process—such as a signed affidavit or other basic documentation—should be sufficient, without creating unnecessary barriers or burdens. The goal should be to ensure accuracy while respecting individuals’ identities and dignity.

6. Do you approve of non-binary gender markers such as “X” instead of “M” or “F” on government documents? Why or why not?

Yes, I support offering non-binary markers such as “X” on government documents. Providing this option allows individuals to be accurately represented while ensuring that our systems reflect the diversity of the people they serve. It can be implemented in a way that maintains administrative clarity while respecting individual identity.

7. Should a transgender child who wants to participate in athletics but is uncomfortable in a program for their sex assigned at birth be allowed to participate in a program for the gender they transitioned to? (e.g. a transgender girl who is uncomfortable playing on a boys’ team but who wants to take part in sports).

Transgender students should be allowed to participate in athletics consistent with their gender identity. Excluding a student from participation based on their sex assigned at birth is discriminatory and undermines their well-being and sense of belonging.

We should be guided by facts—there is no credible evidence to support claims that inclusive policies create harm or undermine competition. As Chair of Ways and Means in the House of Delegates, I opposed efforts to block transgender youth from participating in sports, and as County Executive, I will continue to stand for inclusion, equity, and opportunity for every student.

8. When transgender people are incarcerated or detained, how should officials decide what gender they should be held with?

Decisions about housing in detention settings should prioritize the trans detainee’s preferred placement.

9. What restrictions, if any, would be appropriate on entertainment, such as drag shows, with content that involves crossdressing or other gender-nonconforming behavior?

Drag and gender-nonconforming expression are longstanding forms of artistic and cultural expression. As with any entertainment, content should be appropriately designated for audiences, but additional restrictions are not necessary. As we see those kinds of restrictions come up across the country, we need to stand firm against them.

10. When should therapies, such as conversion therapy, that seek to alter patients’ LGBTQ+ identity or change the behavior associated with such an identity, be allowed? When should they be restricted? Does it matter if the patient is a minor?

Never. Conversion therapy is harmful, ineffective, and has been widely discredited by major medical and mental health organizations. It should not be allowed under any circumstances, and especially not for minors, who are particularly vulnerable to its lasting harm.

I was proud to have voted for Maryland’s ban on conversion therapy while serving in the General Assembly, because protecting the health, dignity, and well-being of LGBTQ+ individuals—especially young people—is not optional. It is a responsibility.