Federal Judge Halts Trump’s Passport Gender Policy—Victory for Trans and Nonbinary Rights

Federal Judge Halts Trump’s Passport Gender Policy—Victory for Trans and Nonbinary Rights

DECK
Ruling preserves access to ‘X’ gender marker and passport updates for six plaintiffs as court challenges controversial executive order

---

KEY FACTS

• What: Judge temporarily blocks federal policy banning “X” gender marker and restricting changes to gender designation on passports

• Who: U.S. District Judge Julia Kobick rules in favor of ACLU’s preliminary injunction

• When: Ruling issued on Friday

• Where: Massachusetts, U.S. District Court

• Why: Policy deemed discriminatory and not legally justified

• How: Legal challenge argues policy violates constitutional protections and administrative law

---

SITUATION SNAPSHOT
Outside the Massachusetts courthouse, supporters waved pride flags as news spread of the court’s decision. For many transgender and nonbinary Americans, the ruling brought a sigh of relief after months of uncertainty and fear over losing accurate identification documents.

---

WHAT WE KNOW
U.S. District Judge Julia Kobick, appointed under President Biden, granted a preliminary injunction sought by the ACLU to stop enforcement of the Trump administration’s passport policy targeting gender identity.

The ruling means that six named plaintiffs can continue to request passports reflecting their correct gender identities, including the use of the “X” gender marker.

Judge Kobick emphasized that the policy and related executive order classify applicants by sex, thereby triggering intermediate judicial scrutiny. She wrote: "The Executive Order and the Passport Policy on their face classify passport applicants on the basis of sex and thus must be reviewed under intermediate judicial scrutiny."

According to Kobick, the government failed to demonstrate a substantial justification for the policy. She added that the plaintiffs had shown the policy was "based on irrational prejudice toward transgender Americans and therefore offend our Nation's constitutional commitment to equal protection for all Americans."

She also noted that the policy may violate the Paperwork Reduction Act and Administrative Procedure Act, stating it was "arbitrary and capricious" and implemented without proper regulatory procedure.

---

WHAT’S NEXT
The ACLU intends to expand the ruling's impact by requesting that it apply to all transgender, nonbinary, and intersex individuals nationwide. Meanwhile, the court will continue hearing the broader legal case as it unfolds.

The federal government could appeal the injunction, and further legal developments are expected in the coming weeks.

---

VOICES ON THE GROUND
"This decision is a critical victory against discrimination and for equal justice under the law," said Li Nowlin-Sohl, senior staff attorney with the ACLU’s LGBTQ & HIV Project. "But it's also a historic win in the fight against this administration's efforts to drive transgender people out of public life. The State Department's policy is a baseless barrier for transgender and intersex Americans and denies them the dignity we all deserve."

Nowlin-Sohl confirmed that the organization will seek to expand the ruling beyond the initial plaintiffs.

---

CONTEXT
In January, President Trump signed an executive order that narrowed the federal definition of sex to male or female at birth. The order rejected gender transition recognition, aligning with conservative ideology but contradicting the views of major medical organizations and the policies of the prior administration.

Under the new directive, transgender, nonbinary, and intersex Americans faced major roadblocks in obtaining accurate identification, sparking widespread backlash and legal challenges.

In the lawsuit, the ACLU detailed personal stories of affected individuals, including one woman whose passport was returned with an incorrect gender marker and others who feared applying due to possible delays or retaliation.

One plaintiff, Ash Lazarus Orr, faced accusations of document fraud by the TSA in early January while traveling, due to mismatched gender markers on his state and federal IDs. He applied for a corrected passport four days before President Trump assumed office.

The Trump administration has defended the policy, asserting it does not violate constitutional rights and arguing that passport issuance falls under presidential discretion. "Some Plaintiffs additionally allege that having inconsistent identification documents will heighten the risk that an official will discover that they are transgender," the Justice Department wrote in its filing. "But the Department is not responsible for Plaintiffs' choice to change their sex designation for state documents but not their passport."

---

REPORTER INSIGHT
From court filings to emotional testimonies, the fight over passport gender policies is more than a legal dispute—it’s about the recognition and dignity of identities. For many, this ruling offers a temporary shield against erasure in official records, but the battle for inclusive federal recognition continues.