Students in D.C. and Prince George’s and Montgomery Counties are protected from discrimination and harassment (by other students, faculty, or staff) on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity. [1]  GLBT student groups must be recognized and allowed to hold functions in the same way as other student groups. [2]

[1] DC: 5 DCMR § 2401.9; Prince George’s County Public Schools Code of Student Conduct, Administrative Procedure 10101, § XIV (A)-(C); Montgomery County Public Schools, Student Rights and Responsibilities, Regulation JFA-RA, § IV (K). Maryland school districts are required to track harassment or intimidation of gay students, among others, until 2009 and make an annual report to the state of incidents and what they did about them. Md. Code, Education, § 7-424. For an unusual case holding that a school could take action against a student wearing an anti-gay T-shirt (finding the message to be a form of psychological attack), see Harper v. Poway Unified Sch. Dist., 445 F.3d 1166 (9th Cir. 2006), discussed under Dress Codes, Uniforms and Personal Appearance.
[2] Passed in 1984, a federal law called the Equal Access Act was intended by its supporters to end discrimination against religious speech by school authorities and to protect the rights of high school students to hold religious-oriented meetings on campus. 20 U.S.C. § 4071-74. Along with fundamental First Amendment free expression law, it has become a valuable legal tool to protect rights of LGBTQ students. For federal court decisions upholding LGBTQ students’ rights to have a campus club, see Colin v. Orange Unified Sch. Dist., 83 F. Supp. 2d 1135 (C.D. Cal. 2000) (granting preliminary injunction after finding that the school board's denial of a gay student group’s request for recognition was likely a violation of the Equal Access Act); Boyd County High School Gay/Straight Alliance v. Board of Educ. of Boyd County, Ky., 258 F. Supp. 2d 667 (E.D. Ky. 2003) (allowing a gay student club to meet at school since there was no evidence it would materially or substantially interfere with the orderly conduct of educational activities within the school; limit the school's ability to maintain order and discipline on campus; or limit the school's ability to protect the well-being of its students and faculty); East High Sch. Prism Club v. Seidel, 95 F. Supp. 2d 1239 (D. Utah 2000) (granting preliminary injunction on the basis that a gay student group was likely curriculum-related and had thus probably been improperly prevented from organizing and meeting on school property in violation of First Amendment). But despite those good decisions, see the ominous new theory asserted by the school on which the gay student group loses, Caudillo v. Lubbock Indep. Sch. Dist., 311 F. Supp. 2d 550 (N.D. Tex. 2004) (upholding denial of gay student club under two subsections of the Equal Access Act statute preserving the school district’s authority to maintain discipline and protect the well-being of students and faculty). And schools can just cancel all clubs. East High Gay/Straight Alliance v. Bd. of Educ. of Salt Lake City Sch. Dist., 81 F. Supp. 2d 1166 (D. Utah 1999) (finding no violation of the Equal Access Act, when, in response to the formation of a gay high school student group, the school board barred all “non-curriculum-related” student groups).