Constructing Inclusivity: How State Laws and Local Community Contexts Shape LGBTQ+ Student Inclusion and Belonging in Schools.

Though lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ+) youth face increased risk for mental health problems, research suggests that protective state-level legislation and school-level supports can reduce this risk. However, the effectiveness of state laws and school policies may depend on how they are enacted in schools, and particularly whether they are contested by local communities. To examine this idea, we compare ethnographic and interview data from 2019-2023 from two Colorado public school districts in different community contexts. We find that despite shared state laws, these districts construct LGBTQ+ inclusivity differently and that this difference is shaped, in part, by community politics. In the more liberal Ensley Public Schools, protective state laws are integrated into district policy and practices, and school staff are intentional and consistent about creating inclusivity for LGBTQ+ students. In the more conservative Field Public Schools, we find similar district policies, but staff are more constrained in cultivating LGBTQ+ inclusion due to community attitudes that contest support for LGBTQ+ students. We leverage these findings to consider how external community contexts shape the experience of state laws and associated policies for LGBTQ+ youth in schools, with implications for sociological theory and policy.