A federal judge has broadened a previous ruling that prevented the implementation of policy alterations initiated by the Trump administration concerning gender markers on passports. This development has significant implications for transgender and nonbinary Americans.
The background to this situation is important. The president, in a January executive order, relied on a restrictive interpretation of sex rather than a more inclusive understanding of gender. The order mandates that an individual is either male or female, dismissing the concept that a person can transition from the sex assigned at birth to another gender.
U.S. District Judge Julia Kobick expanded her initial ruling to include those desiring a passport that doesn’t align with the male/female sex designation assigned at birth and those seeking an ‘X’ designation. This ruling pertains exclusively to individuals without a valid passport, those with passports due to expire within the year, and those who must apply for a passport due to loss, theft, or the need for a name or sex designation change.
Initially, the ruling applied only to the six plaintiffs in the case. However, Kobick, who was appointed by President Joe Biden, supported the American Civil Liberties Union’s request for a preliminary injunction last month. The injunction halts the action while the lawsuit continues, mandating the State Department to issue passports to the six transgender and nonbinary individuals involved in the lawsuit, with sex designations that align with their identified gender.
The evidence suggests that the Trump administration defended the passport policy change, arguing it ‘does not violate the equal protection guarantees of the Constitution.’ They further contended that the president has considerable discretion in establishing passport policy, and that the plaintiffs would not be harmed by the policy, as they retain the freedom to travel abroad.