Brief

Anti-LGBT Victimization in the United States

Results from the National Crime Victimization Survey (2022-2023)
February 2025

This study uses data from the 2022 and 2023 National Crime Victimization Survey to examine the rates of violent victimization between LGBT and non-LGBT people in the U.S.

Highlights
LGBT people are five times more likely than non-LGBT people to be victims of violent crime.
Black LGBT people have the highest rates of victimization overall, followed by Hispanic and White LGBT people.
LGBT people are nine times more likely to experience violent hate crimes than non-LGBT people.
Data Points
106.4 per 1,000
rate of victimization among LGBT people
21.1 per 1,000
rate of victimization among non-LGBT people
Brief

In his first weeks in office, and consistent with his campaign language, President Trump issued executive orders that target or severely impact LGBT people.1 The orders include declaring that the U.S. federal government will officially recognize only two sexes based on sex at birth, male and female;2 ending diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs across federal minority groups;3 and rolling back anti-discrimination legal protections for LGBT people.4

President Trump, members of Congress, and state legislators have been clear throughout their 2024 campaigns and since the election that they plan to attack LGBT rights, both in state and federal policies and laws.5 Indeed, over the past decade, states across the country have initiated legislative proposals and have passed several statutes that limit the rights of LGBT people, with especially severe attacks on transgender rights. In 2023, the ACLU tracked 510 anti-LGBT bills, and in 2024, it tracked 533 anti-LGBT bills that were introduced in state legislatures across the United States,6 representing an increase over previous years.7 This year, by February 10, 2025, the ACLU had already tracked 339 anti-LGBT bills across the U.S.8

Similar efforts have been made in the U.S. Congress. In 2024, Congress killed legislation that earmarked funds for LGBT organizations, including, for example, funds to build 74 new housing units for LGBT seniors in Massachusetts and to construct a new community center for the Gay Community Center of Philadelphia.9 In December 2024, the U.S. Senate passed the defense budget by an 85 to 14 vote, a bill that included a ban on TRICARE, the military’s health care plan for service members, from covering medical treatment of gender dysphoria that the bill alleged “could result in sterilization” for children under 18.10 In January 2025, the House of Representatives passed a bill that would prohibit federal funding from going to K-12 schools that allow transgender girls on girls’ sports teams, effectively barring transgender girls from female school sports teams.11

These recent developments continue years of attacks on LGB, and especially transgender people. Such acts can lead to increased violence against LGBT people. For example, researchers found that following Trump campaign rallies in 2016, which the authors described as containing hate rhetoric, there was an increase in hate-motivated incidents in the counties where the rallies happened as compared to other counties and the same counties prior to the rally.12 Similarly, after the 2016 presidential elections, transgender and gender non-conforming people reported experiences of hate speech and violence.13 Following online attacks on transgender care, hospitals and doctors faced increased harassment, including death threats.14 This rhetoric and the anti-LGBT sentiments it promotes can lead to adverse mental health outcomes for LGBT people.15

Violent Victimization of LGBT people in the United States 2022-2023 

In this report, we present our analysis of pooled National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) data from 2022 and 2023 (N = 540,732). NCVS is a survey that documents experiences with victimization in a representative sample of the United States population.16

We found that LGBT people experienced 106.4 violent victimizations17 per 1,000 persons, and transgender people experienced victimization at a rate of 93.7 per 1,000, compared with 21.1 per 1,000 among non-LGBT persons.18

LGBT rates of victimization by race/ethnicity show that Black (non-Hispanic) LGBT people had the highest rates of victimization overall, followed by Hispanic and White (non-Hispanic) LGBT people. Rates for cisgender straight populations were similar across these race/ethnicity groups (Figure 1).19

LGBT people experienced a higher rate of serious violence, defined as rape or sexual assault, robbery, or aggravated assault, than non-LGBT people (53.7 vs. 8.5 per 1,000),20 including higher rates of violence involving a weapon (27.4 vs. 5.7 per 1,000)21 and serious violence resulting in injuries (21.3 vs. 2.4 per 22 LGBT people were also more likely to experience violent hate crimes (6.4 vs. 0.7 per 1,000).2324

Conclusion

Consistent with prior findings, our results show that compared with non-LGBT people, LGBT people have been subject to disparities in exposure to violence, including hate crimes.25 LGBT victims of violence are also more likely than non-LGBT people to experience attacks that are more violent and to suffer injuries because of these attacks. The curtailment and elimination of civil rights protections for LGBT people in the United States puts them at risk for increased victimization and hate crimes.

Methodology

The NCVS uses a stratified, multi-stage cluster sample of households in the United States that surveys individuals aged 12 years and older.26 The purpose of the NCVS is to document the prevalence and characteristics of violent and property crimes in the U.S., regardless of whether such experiences were reported to the police. Data collection for the NCVS is performed on a continuous basis, with households probabilistically selected, recruited, and empaneled for 3.5 years and interviewed at six-month intervals. The U.S. Census Bureau field representatives conduct the NCVS interviews either in person or over the telephone.

The NCVS documents sexual orientation and gender identity among individuals aged 16 years and older.27 Sexual orientation was measured with the following question, “Which of the following best represents how you think of yourself?” with response options: “Lesbian or gay, Straight, that is, not lesbian or gay, Bisexual, Something else,” or “I don’t know the answer.” To measure gender identity, respondents were asked about their sex assigned at birth and their current gender identity. Respondents who indicated they were lesbian, gay, or bisexual, had a current gender identity that differed from their assigned sex at birth, or indicated their current gender identity was “transgender” were categorized as LGBT.28 All others were considered as non-LGBT.

The NCVS asks respondents if they are of Hispanic origin and which race(s) they identify with. Response options include “White, Black/African American, American Indian/Alaska Native, Asian/Native Hawaiian/other Pacific Islander,” and “other race.”29 For this analysis, respondents who indicated they were of Hispanic origin were categorized as Hispanic, regardless of race group chosen; respondents who identified as Black/African American were categorized as Black regardless of other race groups chosen (with the exception of Hispanic origin); respondents who chose White and no other race/ethnicity were categorized as White.

All analyses incorporated appropriate weight and design variables for population estimates.

Download the full brief

Anti-LGBT Victimization in the United States

Redfield, E. (2025, January). Impact of ban on gender-affirming care on transgender minors. Williams Institute, UCLA School of Law. Los Angeles. https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/publications/impact-gac-ban-eo/; Redfield, J., & Chokshi, M. (2025, January). Impact of the executive order redefining sex on transgender, nonbinary, and intersex people. Williams Institute, UCLA School of Law. Los Angeles. https://williamsinstitute.law. ucla.edu/publications/impact-eo-redefine-sex-tbi/; Sears, B. (2025, January). Impact of executive order revoking non-discrimination protections for LGBTQ federal employees and employees of federal contractors. Williams Institute, UCLA School of Law. Los Angeles. https://williamsinstitute.law. ucla.edu/publications/impact-eo-nd-federal-workers/

Arkin, D., Alcindor, Y., & Lavietes, M. (2025, January 22). Trump signs executive orders proclaiming there are only two biological sexes, halting diversity programs. NBC News. https://www.nbcnews.com/nbc-out/out-politics-and-policy/trump-sign-executive-orders-proclaiming-are-only-two-biological-sexes-rcna188388?t; Redfield, E., & Chokshi, I. (2025, January). Impact of the Executive Order Redefining Sex on Transgender, Nonbinary, and Intersex People [Policy brief]. The Williams Institute, UCLA School of Law. https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/publications/ impact-eo-redefine-sex-tbi/

Flowers, B., & Trotta, D. (2025, January 20). Trump curtails protections around diversity, LGBTQ rights. Reuters. https://www.reuters.com/world/us/ trump-sign-orders-ending-diversity-programs-proclaiming-there-are-only-two-sexes-2025-01-20/?t

Green, E. L., & Montague, Z. (2025, January 20). Trump signs two orders to dismantle equity policies. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes. com/2025/01/20/us/politics/trump-transgender-race-education.html; Sears, B. (2025, January). Impact of Executive Order Revoking Non-Discrimination Protections for LGBTQ Federal Employees and Employees of Federal Contractors [Policy brief]. The Williams Institute, UCLA School of Law. https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/publications/impact-eo-nd-federal-workers/

Thompson, I., Esseks, J., & Cooper, L. (2024, June 12). Erasing LGBTQ freedoms by rolling back protections, mandating discrimination, and weaponizing federal law against transgender people. ACLU. https://www.aclu.org/trump-on-lgbtq-rights

American Civil Liberties Union. (2023, December 21). Mapping attacks on LGBTQ rights in U.S. state legislatures in 2023. https://www.aclu. org/legislative-attacks-on-lgbtq-rights-2023; American Civil Liberties Union. (2024, December 6). Mapping attacks on LGBTQ rights in U.S. state legislatures in 2024. https://www.aclu.org/legislative-attacks-on-lgbtq-rights-2024

Choi, A. (2024, January 22). Record number of anti-LGBTQ bills were introduced in 2023. CNN. https://www.cnn.com/politics/anti-lgbtq-plus-state-bill-rights-dg

American Civil Liberties Union. (2025, February 2025). Mapping attacks on LGBTQ rights in U.S. state legislatures in 2025. ACLU. https://www.aclu. org/legislative-attacks-on-lgbtq-rights-2025

Edmondson, C. (2024, May 14). House G.O.P. defunds L.G.B.T.Q. centers by banning earmarks for nonprofits. The New York Times. https://www. nytimes.com/2024/05/14/us/politics/gop-earmarks-lgbtq-centers.html

Demirjian, K. (2024, December 18). Senate clears defense bill denying transgender care to minors. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes. com/2024/12/18/us/politics/senate-defense-bill-transgender-care-minors.html

Karni, A. (2025, January 14). House passes bill to bar trans athletes from female school sports teams. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes. com/2025/01/14/us/politics/house-trans-athletes.html

Feinberg, A., Branton, R., & Martinez-Ebers, V. (2022). The Trump effect: How 2016 campaign rallies explain spikes in hate. PS: Political Science & Politics, 55(2), 257–265. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1049096521001621

Veldhuis, C. B., Drabble, L., Riggle, E. D. B., Wootton, A. R., & Hughes, T. L. (2018). “I fear for my safety, but want to show bravery for others”: Violence and discrimination concerns among transgender and gender non-conforming individuals after the 2016 presidential election. Violence and Gender, 5(1), 26–36. https://doi.org/10.1089/vio.2017.0072; cited in: Flores, A. R., Stotzer, R. L., Meyer, I. H., & Langton, L. L. (2022). Hate crimes against LGBT people: National Crime Victimization Survey, 2017-2019. PloS one, 17(12), e0279363. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0279363

Human Rights Campaign. (2022). Online harassment, offline violence: Unchecked harassment of gender-affirming care providers and children’s hospitals on social media, and its offline violent consequences. https://hrc-prod-requests.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/HRCF-OnlineHarassmentOfflineViolence.pdf

Krueger, E. A., Westmoreland, D. A., Choi, S. K., Harper, G. W., Lightfoot, M., Hammack, P. L., & Meyer, I. H. (2021). Mental health among Black and Latinx sexual minority adults leading up to and following the 2016 US presidential election: Results from a natural experiment. LGBT Health, 8(7), 454-462 and Latinx sexual minority adults leading up to and following the 2016 US presidential election: Results from a natural experiment; Frost, D. M., & Fingerhut, A. W. (2016). Daily exposure to negative campaign messages decreases same-sex couples’ psychological and relational well-being. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 19(4), 477-492. https://doi.org/10.1089/lgbt.2020.0454; Gonzalez, K. A., Ramirez, J. L., & Galupo, M. P. (2018). Increase in GLBTQ Minority Stress Following the 2016 US https://doi. org/10.1177/1368430216642028

Bureau of Justice Statistics. (n.d.). National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS). U.S. Department of Justice. https://bjs.ojp.gov/programs/ncvs

A violent victimization is an attack or threat of attack including simple assaults and acts of serious violence (e.g., rape or sexual assault, robbery, aggravated assault, or violence involving a weapon). Estimates represent respondents who reported on at least one incident within the past 6 months.

95% confidence intervals (CI) for these estimates are: LGBT people (85.0, 127.8), transgender people (54.3, 133.1), and non-LGBT (cisgender straight) people (19.6, 22.7). The difference between sexual and gender minorities and the cisgender/straight populations are statistically significant; the odds ratio (95% CI) for LGBT vs. non-LGBT = 5.5 (4.3, 6.8), and for transgender vs. non-LGBT = 4.8 (2.5, 7.1).

95% confidence intervals (CI) for these estimates are: Black LGBT people (102.3, 307.3), Hispanic LGBT people (73.9, 167.7), White LGBT people (62.3, 105.1), Black non-LGBT (cisgender straight) people (18.2, 27.2), Hispanic non-LGBT people (17.5, 23.7), White non-LGBT people (19.9, 23.5).

95% confidence intervals for LGBT people (39.5, 67.9) and non-LGBT people (7.6, 9.5); odds ratio: 6.6 (4.5, 8.7).

95% confidence interval for LGBT people (17.4, 37.4) and non-LGBT people (5.0, 6.5); odds ratio: 4.9 (2.8, 6.9).

95% confidence interval for LGBT people (13.0, 29.6) and non-LGBT people (1.9, 2.8); odds ratio: 9.1 (5.1, 13.2).

A hate crime follows the definition from the Bureau of Justice Statistics. Victims who suspect the incident may have been a hate crime are asked why they thought the incident was a hate crime. If victims say their attackers used hate language or symbols or if the police confirmed to the victim that the incident was a hate crime, then it is classified as a hate crime. Bureau of Justice Statistics. (n.d.). Hate crime in the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS). https://bjs.ojp.gov/topics/crime/hate-crime#:~:text=The%20National%20Crime%20Victimization%20Survey,hate%20 crime%20in%20the%20NCVS. Accessed February 10, 2025.

95% confidence interval for LGBT people (3.1, 9.7) and non-LGBT people (0.5, 0.9); odds ratio: 9.8 (4.1, 15.5).

Truman, J. L., Morgan, R. E., & Coen, E. J. (2024). Characteristics and consequences of violent victimization in sexual and gender minority communities: An analysis of the 2017-2021 National Crime Victimization Survey. LGBT Health, 11(7), 552–562. https://doi.org/10.1089/ lgbt.2023.0110; Flores, A. R., Wilson, B. D. M., Langton, L. L., & Meyer, I. H. (2023). Violent victimization at the intersections of sexual orientation, gender identity, and race: National Crime Victimization Survey, 2017-2019. PloS one, 18(2), e0281641, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0281641; Flores, A. R., Stotzer, R. L., Meyer, I. H., & Langton, L. L. (2022). Hate crimes against LGBT people: National Crime Victimization Survey, 2017- 2019. PloS one, 17(12), e0279363. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0279363; Truman, J. L., & Morgan, R. E. (2022, June). Violent victimization by sexual orientation and gender identity, 2017–2020 (NCJ 304277). Bureau of Justice Statistics. https://bjs.ojp.gov/content/pub/pdf/vvsogi1720.pdf

Bureau of Justice Statistics (2022-2023). National Crime Victimization Survey [Data set]. https://bjs.ojp.gov/data-collection/ncvs

Bureau of Justice Statistics. (2022). National Crime Victimization Survey [Questionnaires]. https://bjs.ojp.gov/data-collection/ncvs#surveys-0; Truman J.L., Morgan R.E., Gilbert T., & Vaghela, P. (2019). Measuring sexual orientation and gender identity in the National Crime Victimization Survey. Journal of Official Statistics, 35(4):835–858. https://doi.org/10.2478/jos-2019-0035

Respondents could refuse to answer their sex assigned at birth but also indicate their current gender is “transgender.” These respondents are included in our categorization of LGBT.

Bureau of Justice Statistics. (2021). Race and ethnicity in the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS). U.S. Department of Justice. https://bjs. ojp.gov/topics/race-ethnicity#:~:text=The%20National%20Crime%20Victimization%20Survey,changed%20in%20the%202003%20NCVS