Chuck Williams and Stu Walter give a $2.5 million planned gift to establish the first-ever LGBT academic research institution at a law school to ensure facts — not stereotypes — inform laws and policies.
What happened next?
The Williams Institute Legacy Campaign
Honoring Our Past, Shaping Our Future
In 2001, we began with a vision of creating a world-class research center to advance LGBTQ+ law and public policy through rigorous research. Over the past 22 years, we have become a trusted and indispensable resource — and our work is as important today as ever.
Fighting stereotypes
One gift started it all
What happened next?
Over the next two decades, the Williams Institute’s research would inform federal legislation, such as the repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell and the Equality Act. The Institute’s research would also influence presidential executive orders and Supreme Court decisions — including Obergefell v. Hodges, Bostock v. Clayton County, and most recently, Justice Sotomayor’s dissent in 303 Creative v. Elenis.
2003
Lawrence v. Texas Amicus Brief
The Williams Institute submits its first amicus brief in Lawrence v. Texas, arguing that sodomy laws violate the U.S. Constitution.
The Supreme Court struck down sodomy laws, holding that the laws violate the fundamental, constitutional rights of LGBTQ people.
What is an amicus brief?
What is an amicus brief?
An amicus brief is a legal document filed by an individual or organization that is not a party to a case but assists the court by offering information, expertise, or insight that bears on relevant issues.
The novel legal argument presented by Williams Institute Founding Faculty Chair Bill Rubenstein in the Institute’s first amicus brief was hailed by the Boston Globe as a strategy that would appeal to more conservative Supreme Court Justices. Justice O’Connor adopted the argument, providing the sixth vote in favor of striking down sodomy laws.
2009
Employment Non-Discrimination Act
Williams Institute Executive Director Brad Sears testifies before Congress on legislation that would prohibit employers from discriminating against people on the basis of their sexual orientation or gender identity.
2014
Executive Order 13672
The White House cites Williams Institute research in support of an executive order that prohibits federal contractors from discriminating against employees based on their sexual orientation or gender identity.
Who met the President?
Who met the President?
Founding Executive Director Brad Sears and Legal Director Christy Mallory were at the White House on July 21, 2014, for President Obama’s signing of Executive Order 13672.
Official White House Photo by Pete Souza
2015
Obergefell v. Hodges
The U.S. Supreme Court cites research by Williams Institute Research Director Gary J. Gates on the children of same-sex parents in its decision to extend marriage equality nationwide.
How data changed minds
How data changed minds
Justice Kennedy explains that Williams Institute estimates on the number of children being raised by same-sex couples helped shape the landmark decision.
“The nature of injustice is you can’t see it in your own time. It seemed to me just wrong under the Constitution that over 100,000 adopted children of gay parents could not have their parents marry.”
2016
Estimating the transgender population
The Williams Institute releases the first state and national estimates of the transgender population. This research continues to be the Institute’s most cited report in the media.
How many transgender people live in the US?
How many transgender people live in the US?
Williams Institute Senior Scholar Jody Herman updated those original estimates in 2022, showing that approximately 1.6 million people ages 13 and older identify as transgender in the United States. This includes about 300,000 youth ages 13-17.
Population of transgender youth in the 50 states and D.C.
2023
303 Creative v. Elenis
0:00
/
The Supreme Court rules that the First Amendment’s free speech protections allow a website designer in Colorado to refuse to serve same-sex couples. In her dissent, Justice Sotomayor cites Williams Institute research showing the continuing high levels of public accommodations discrimination against LGBT people.
What are the implications of the case?
What are the implications of the case?
In an amicus brief, Williams Institute scholars explained that three decades of research by Distinguished Senior Scholar Ilan H. Meyer shows that when a business refuses to serve LGBT people, the experience can add to “minority stress” and result in adverse mental and physical health outcomes.
Echoing this research, Justice Sotomayor’s dissenting opinion emphasizes that the “fundamental object” of public accommodations laws is “to vindicate the deprivation of personal dignity that accompanies discrimination and causes stigmatizing injury.”
Shaping our future
In the face of a growing number of statutes rolling back LGBTQ rights — and increasing disinformation about LGBTQ people — our research will continue to inform policymakers, judges, and voters as they make decisions that affect LGBTQ communities. Your support helps us continue our work until LGBTQ people have full equality under the law and in their daily lives.
Related events
Legacy Gala
Our celebration of the Williams Institute's founder Chuck Williams and his accomplishments
The Ebell of Los Angeles
Doors open at 5:00 PM
Dinner at 7:00 PM
DC Spring Reception
Our annual D.C. event examining the current slate of LGBTQ legislation
King & Spalding Office
6:00 – 8:00 PM EST
Washington, DC