Supreme Court Backs Trump on Ending “X” Gender Marker in Passports

UPDATE: The Supreme Court has just ruled to allow the Trump administration to proceed with its controversial policy ending the use of the “X” gender marker on U.S. passports. This decision, made on October 26, 2023, effectively mandates that passports reflect the holder’s biological sex at birth, impacting countless transgender and nonbinary individuals across the nation.

The ruling freezes a previous decision by a lower court that had temporarily blocked the enforcement of this policy, which was initially established by President Trump earlier this year. The Supreme Court’s decision was notably divided, with a 6-3 vote, indicating a sharp ideological split among the justices.

This urgent update comes at a critical time for many who identify as transgender or nonbinary, as it means they will no longer have the option of self-selecting their gender on passport applications. Instead, the State Department will only provide options for “M” or “F,” which many argue does not reflect their lived realities.

The court emphasized that displaying sex at birth is a matter of recording a historical fact, as stated in their unsigned ruling. They argued that the government’s decision does not violate equal protection principles, asserting, “respondents have failed to establish that the Government’s choice to display biological sex lacks any purpose other than a bare desire to harm a politically unpopular group.”

Transgender and nonbinary advocates are expressing deep concern over this ruling. Seven individuals previously filed a lawsuit against the administration, arguing that the policy is unconstitutional and violates federal law. U.S. District Judge Julia Kobick had ruled in favor of the plaintiffs earlier this year, stating that the new policy lacked a reasoned explanation and was motivated by discrimination against transgender individuals.

“Viewed as a whole, the language of the Executive Order is candid in its rejection of the identity of an entire group — transgender Americans,” Kobick wrote.

Judge Kobick’s preliminary injunction had allowed passport applicants to select a gender marker that aligns with their gender identity, including the “X” designation for nonbinary individuals. However, following the Supreme Court’s decision, the Trump administration will now be able to enforce its directive that defines “sex” strictly based on biological classification.

The implications of this ruling extend beyond individual identity; they touch upon broader issues of civil rights and government policy. The Trump administration argued that the lower court’s decision overstepped its bounds, interfering with the president’s constitutional authority to dictate foreign policy, particularly as it relates to international travel documentation.

For many, this ruling signifies a setback in the ongoing fight for transgender rights in the United States. Advocates argue that by enforcing a binary classification system, the administration is not only denying individuals their rights but also jeopardizing their safety and ability to travel freely.

As this situation develops, stakeholders are urging continued advocacy for the rights of transgender and nonbinary individuals. Legal experts and activists are preparing to respond to this latest ruling, which could set a precedent for future policies affecting personal identity on government documents.

With this landmark decision now in place, all eyes will remain on how the State Department implements this policy and the reactions it provokes from advocates and affected individuals alike. The fight for inclusive representation continues, as many hope that this ruling will not deter progress in the ongoing struggle for equality.