DOJ Funds Research Linking Gender Dysphoria to Violent Crime 2026

The US Department of Justice is funding research aimed at exploring whether there is a link between gender dysphoria and violent crime, a move that critics say is part of a broader anti-trans agenda. Last month, the National Institute of Justice (NIJ), the research arm of the justice department, announced it would grant up to $1 million for studies into the frequency and type of violence committed by people diagnosed and treated for gender dysphoria.

The notice comes as the Trump administration has aggressively sought to curtail the rights of transgender people in the US, limiting their access to healthcare and identification documents with their correct gender identity. It also follows more than a year of funding cuts to research into hate-fueled and extremist violence.

Why the DOJ Is Funding This Research

The NIJ’s solicitation seeks to understand violence patterns among those with gender dysphoria. But experts and LGBTQ+ advocates call the effort “pseudoscience” because it departs from a growing body of evidence showing that transgender people are more likely to be victims of violence than perpetrators.

Wendy Via, co-founder and CEO of the Global Project Against Hate and Extremism (GPAHE), said the Trump administration has repeatedly sought to falsely portray transgender people as more likely to commit extremist violence. “What the administration is doing is very dangerous,” Via said.

The Danger of Misleading Narratives

By pushing this narrative, the administration diverts attention from violence driven by far-right extremist ideologies such as the “great replacement” theory, which several high-profile shooters have cited in their manifestos, Via added.

This research funding is part of a pattern: the administration has cut funding for research into hate-fueled and extremist violence while commissioning studies that target marginalized groups. Critics argue this is a deliberate attempt to stigmatize transgender people and justify discriminatory policies.

What the Science Actually Says

Studies consistently show that transgender individuals face elevated rates of violence, discrimination, and mental health challenges—not because of their gender identity, but because of societal stigma and lack of support. Linking gender dysphoria to violent crime without evidence risks reinforcing harmful stereotypes.

Major medical and psychological associations, including the American Psychological Association and the American Academy of Pediatrics, oppose such framing and support gender-affirming care as medically necessary.

Key Takeaways

• The DOJ’s NIJ is offering up to $1 million for research on gender dysphoria and violent crime.
• Critics label the effort pseudoscience and part of an anti-trans political agenda.
• The administration has simultaneously cut funding for research on extremist violence.
• Experts warn the research could stigmatize trans people and distract from far-right violence.
• Evidence shows trans people are more often victims, not perpetrators, of violence.

Comparing Research Funding Priorities

What to Watch Next

As the NIJ begins reviewing grant applications, watch for how the research is framed and whether it adheres to ethical standards. Advocacy groups are likely to challenge any findings that stigmatize trans people. The administration’s broader rollback of trans rights—from healthcare to ID documents—will continue to face legal and public pushback.

For context on how the administration has targeted critics and the press, see our report on Trump’s DoJ dropping its subpoena effort against the New York Times. That case underscores the DOJ’s willingness to use its power against perceived adversaries. The background to this story is set out in Trump's Address Aimed at Destabilizing US Electoral System. A related thread runs through Celebrity: latest articles.

The administration’s approach to transgender issues also echoes historical battles over identity and sports, such as the legacy of Renée Richards, trans sports pioneer and complicated legacy. Understanding this history helps explain today’s polarized debates. Earlier coverage in US Midterm Elections 2026: A Referendum on Trump's Presidency shows how the argument developed. A closer look at the same subject appears in E Jean Carroll Fights Trump's Supreme Court Bid to Toss $83M Verdict.

As the DOJ moves forward with this funding, the implications for civil rights and scientific integrity are significant. The research could shape public perception and policy for years to come. Anyone following the wider picture can start with Retired Michigan Teacher Freed From Russian Prison After Four Years. The same theme surfaces in Federal Judge Dismisses Trump Lawsuit Over Harvard Admissions Data, which takes a different angle.