"Two Genders" Passport Policy

[Rick]

Federal Lawsuit Challenges "Two Genders" Passport Policy

Seven individuals have filed a federal lawsuit against the State Department after an Executive Order barred people from updating the sex designation on their passports, preventing them from obtaining passports that reflect their accurate gender.

On 20 January 2025, Trump signed an Executive Order aimed at enforcing discrimination against transgender individuals across federal agencies and government programs. Among other things, the order instructed the Departments of State and Homeland Security to ensure that government-issued identification, including passports, visas, and Global Entry cards, reflect a person’s sex “at conception.” As a result, within 24 hours, the State Department began withholding some passports and other documents — such as birth certificates and court orders — submitted by transgender, intersex, and non-binary applicants seeking to update their sex designation. Others had their applications rejected, with newly-issued passports reverting to their sex assigned at birth.

For years, including those in the first Trump administration, the State Department has allowed people to make changes in sex designation on their passports to better align with their gender identity. In 2022, under President Biden, the State Department revised its policy to make changes in sex designation easier and to allow individuals to select M, F, or X for their sex. In 21 states, the District of Columbia, and many countries around the world, similar policies apply for birth certificates and driver’s licenses.

Since the executive order took effect, the State Department has publicly stated that applications requesting a sex designation matching a person’s gender identity, rather than their sex assigned at birth, have been suspended. An official with the White House has also stated that the policy requiring passports to bear the holder’s sex assigned at birth “will not be applied retroactively,” so existing passports are valid, but it will be applied to passport renewals.

Along with the national ACLU, the ACLU of Massachusetts and the law firm Covington & Burling LLP are representing the plaintiffs in the suit, who are unable to obtain passports that align with their gender identity, or who are at risk of being affected when they next renew. The complaint was filed in US District Court for the District of Massachusetts.

The lawsuit challenges the State Department’s passport policy by arguing that it violates the Administrative Procedure Act by being unconstitutional, arbitrary, and capricious, and by failing to follow the required notice-and-comment process for changes to government forms. It also asserts that the policy violates the Due Process Clause of the US Constitution by unlawfully restricting the freedom of movement of transgender, intersex, and non-binary individuals. The lawsuit also argues that the policy violates the Equal Protection Clause by unjustifiably discriminating against individuals based on sex. Lastly, the suit says the policy violates the First Amendment by forcing people to carry passports with a sex designation that conflicts with their identity, effectively outing them to others and compelling them to convey a government-mandated ideological message with which they disagree.

https://www.advocate.com/news/trump-passport-gender-lawsuit

Rick

 

Edited February 13, 2025 by Rick

[NuderThanNude]

I personally have to wonder 'If we actually need a gender description' on documents or a lot other characteristics for that matter. Example... hair color. Hair color can be changed within minutes. Eye color... People can change their eye color with contact lenses. Do they really add anything to describing the person. Height... A person can have both legs amputated. Maybe a current photo should be all that is necessary but even that can be easily changed.

[...]

Then at times I feel that gender should be assigned at birth depending on the kind of genitals a person is born with and be done with it. But then again I wouldn't be surprised if there have been cases of humans being born without genitals or a mix of genitals of both genders.
 

Edited February 14, 2025 by RodEnuf
This thread is about a legal case, not about reproduction or attraction or sports. The party who brought the case was born with genitals of both genders. That's a fact. Removed off topic content.

[Rick]

Originally Posted 27 June 2017         

Here is a quote pertaining to the first re-opening of the original federal lawsuit, filed in Colorado by a person who was born Intersex, and who has not had surgery to "fix" anything, that eventually led to the recently revoked triad of gender marker choices, M, F, or X, on US passports. In addition to the recently-filed federal case filed in Massachusetts cited above, one fully expects this 10-year-old Colorado-based case, once thought to be settled, to be re-opened a second time.

Colorado: Intersex Case Challenging Binary-Only US Passport Policy Re-Opened

On 26 June 2017, in Zzyym v. Tillerson, formerly Zzyym v. Kerry, the case of the Intersex person challenging male-or-female, binary-only gender marker policy on US passports, in a docket text-only order, Judge Jackson granted the motion to re-open this case.

The reason the case has been re-opened is because despite having several letters from doctors stating that they are intersex, the US State Department has not acknowledged said letters as valid. In 2016, in the original ruling, federal District Court Judge Jackson urged the Department to reconsider its decision. But once again, it has refused:

"The Department is unaware of generally accepted medical standards for diagnosing and evaluating a transition to any sex other than male or female," reads a US State Department refusal letter dated 1 May 2017. "Thus, the Department does not accept a medical certification that specifies transition to a sex other than male or female as evidence for the issuance of a passport."

Zzyym currently has a birth certificate which reads "unknown", and a driver's license which states that they are female, plus the several letters from doctors. However, they are left unable to leave the USA, despite having invitations to speak around the world, as they have been unable to obtain a US passport. The original lawsuit (to the present re-opened case) was filed back in 2015.

"This isn't that hard. Several countries issue passports with gender markers other than 'F' or 'M,'" Paul Castillo, Zzyym's Lambda Legal attorney, said. "And just this past month (in 2017), Oregon officials unanimously voted to allow state residents to select 'X' as a gender marker for their driver's licenses and state IDs. And it looks like other states will soon follow suit. If Oregon can do it, why can't the US State Department?"

Rick

Note: Since 2017, at least 21 additional states have followed Oregon's lead in allowing the triad, M, F, or X, to be valid gender markers on state-issued IDs.

Edited February 13, 2025 by Rick

[Rick]

First Circuit Court of Appeals Denies Stay in US Passport "X" Gender Marker Challenge

On 4 September 2025, a three-judge panel of the 1st Circuit Court of Appeals denied a Trump administration bid to stay the district judge's order. "The government has failed to meet its burden to secure a stay," the justices said. They noted that the lower court's finding that persons affected by the change "will suffer a variety of immediate and irreparable harms from the present enforcement of the challenged policy."

The US State Department first issued such passports in October 2021 under President Biden, with the "X" gender marker reserved for non-binary, intersex, and gender non-conforming individuals.

Trump, in an executive order signed in January 2025, said that "it is the policy of the United States to recognize two sexes, male and female." In line with this order, US passports issued by the State Department were then required to state the biological sex, "M" or "F," of their holder at birth.

Appeals court makes ruling on "X" designation for passports of transgender Americans

Rick
 

[I Didnt Grow Much]

Before I begin, I want to make sure my full intent is clearly known and understood. I mention the following only from a practical and technical point of view, “Wishin’ and hopin’, and thinkin’, and prayin’” everyone here accepts this as it is intended.

In a group of guys this topic came up, and one guy I didn’t know asked, “How far do they take it? I can only pick divorced. Why not divorced but didn’t want it?”

That comment sent me off thinking tangentially. Should the government mandate every company code their systems to include all the new gender types, and if known, force employees to use that knowledge when interacting with customer, or face a fine? Much as some colleges have forced professors to do the same or be put up before a disciplinary committee and possibly fired?

Should that same right then be extended to divorcees who want it to be known they didn't initiate a divorce because it might turn off a potential date? The same for the separated? What about individuals who would like an extended list of ethnicities to clearly indicate the ethnicity with which they prefer to be identified? What if someone has both African-American and Asian genetic mix, but almost never is involved in the African-American community, and wants everyone to know it? The same would go for any mixed genetic situation. What about those of mixed genetic make up by country? I am almost equally Dutch and German, with the tiniest amount of English heritage. When I was a kid calling yourself German was more impressive than being Dutch, regardless of the fact that Germany started World War II, because it seemed a tiny little country had almost taken over the western world. When asked, I always said I was German. What about if it was the other way around and I was offended to be referred to as German, as so many people, especially immigrants, were?

Clearly, the questions could go on for days, but I think everyone gets the point, whether you agree with it or not. Succinctly, when is almost any situation in which someone could be offended taken to the point of being so impractical, and frankly so expensive, that it becomes a huge burden?

Once again, I am simply looking for a debate in the style of a college debate, where emotions are completely left out, and every point stands on the merits of the argument.

Please, if you’re planning to email and yell at me, direct the email to redcrossUSA@NGO.org.

 

[The Jester]

What seems to be behind your ideas is that it might be more fun for guys to change into a sexy blonde say, who gets more dates, attention or whatever...

Conversely for a lesbian women to transition into a macho guy to get the girls...

I'm not judging you or that idea,but presuming anyone here cares enough to debate this*, they will. That's where the shouting etc starts*.*..

It seems to me that is why Rod has "ordered" that the thread be about the legal arguments.

In the military the CO would give orders-a company of knights&Knight commander!.

You could also imagine him as a Supreme Court judge:there are also court orders of course. 

It is a question of whether one respects the commander or court... 

*On LPSG there would have been bloodshed already

**Which you mention yourself.

On 2/13/2025 at 12:02 PM, NuderThanNude said:

Edited by Rod on the 14th.

 

 

Edited May 23 by bigforsmall

[I Didnt Grow Much]

That is why I asked for everyone to remove emotion, and only judge the debate on the topic based on the merits of the arguments. I understand that JTT demanded this all remain about the points of the law, but think about it for a moment, how could any point of any debate on this topic not be about the law if everyone just drops the emotions outside the door.

I know I can do this, and approach it with none of the presumptions you are hinting at, and in some cases directly referring to. If I encountered a post like this, and couldn’t maintain complete objectivity, I wouldn’t enter the debate, just as college debaters lose arguments when emotions cloud, and damage or derail the issue at hand..

Fights are useless and nearly always harmful, on the other hand, thoroughly objective debates impart knowledge to everyone. My questions were genuine, and I would like to hear why the situations I mentioned do or do not deserve discussion, and if not, why?

[canuck45]

My passport has:
Name, Nationality, Birthdate, Sex and Place of Birth

 

17 hours ago, I Didnt Grow Much said:

“How far do they take it? I can only pick divorced. Why not divorced but didn’t want it?”

Re: Company policies
Whether you wanted it or not, you are still divorced, that is your "marital" status.
Single but I don't want it...LOL
 

17 hours ago, I Didnt Grow Much said:

I was offended to be referred to as German, as so many people, especially immigrants, were?

The law wasn't about being offended
The argument was "They noted that the lower court's finding that persons affected by the change "will suffer a variety of immediate and irreparable harms from the present enforcement of the challenged policy."