17
submitted 5 hours ago by dandelion to c/transgender

The Supreme Court on Thursday allowed President Donald Trump’s administration to enforce a policy blocking transgender and nonbinary people from choosing passport sex markers that align with their gender identity.

In a brief, unsigned order, the court said the policy doesn’t appear to discriminate against transgender people. “Displaying passport holders’ sex at birth no more offends equal protection principles than displaying their country of birth,” it said. “In both cases, the Government is merely attesting to a historical fact without subjecting anyone to differential treatment.”

Sex markers began appearing on passports in the mid-1970s and the federal government started allowing them to be changed with medical documentation in the early 1990s, the plaintiffs said in court documents. A 2021 change under President Joe Biden, a Democrat, removed documentation requirements and allowed nonbinary people to choose an X gender marker after years of litigation.

A judge blocked the Trump administration policy in June after a lawsuit from nonbinary and transgender people, some of whom said they were afraid to submit applications. An appeals court left the judge’s order in place.

top 2 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] neuracnu 7 points 4 hours ago

From the 13-page dissent from Justice Jackson (co-signed by justices Kagan and Sotomayor):

“The Court ignores these critical limits on its equitable discretion today. The Government seeks to enforce a questionably legal new policy immediately, but it offers no evidence that it will suffer any harm if it is temporarily enjoined from doing so, while the plaintiffs will be subject to imminent, concrete injury if the policy goes into effect.

The Court nonetheless fails to spill any ink considering the plaintiffs, opting instead to intervene in the Government’s favor without equitable justification, and in a manner that permits harm to be inflicted on the most vulnerable party. Such senseless sidestepping of the obvious equitable outcome has become an unfortunate pattern. So, too, has my own refusal to look the other way when basic principles are selectively discarded.

This Court has once again paved the way for the immediate infliction of injury without adequate (or, really, any) justification. Because I cannot acquiesce to this pointless but painful perversion of our equitable discretion, I respectfully dissent.”

The entire document can be read here: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/25pdf/25a319_i4dj.pdf

[-] MystValkyrie 7 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago)

Worried about how this will develop. I was born in a state that won't let me update my gender marker on my birth certificate under any circumstance, and that added my deadname to the bottom of the document even after I updated my legal name. I only lived in that state for a few months as a newborn. I live in a safe state, and Iowa has still been the bane of my existence ever since I started trying to update my records.

I'm not sure how this will be enforced yet. I'm worried if I'll get detained if I ever try to leave the country now.

this post was submitted on 06 Nov 2025
17 points (100.0% liked)

Transgender

1008 readers
58 users here now

Overview:

The Lemmy place to discuss the news and experiences of transgender people.


Rules:

  1. Keep discussions civil.

  2. Arguments against transgender rights will be removed.

  3. No bigotry is allowed - including transphobia, homophobia, speciesism, racism, sexism, classism, ableism, castism, or xenophobia.

Shinigami Eyes:

Extension for Quickly Spotting Transphobes Online.

Shinigami Eyes

spoiler iphone: unofficial workaround to use extension Install the Orion browser then add the extension. :::

Related:!lgbtq_plus@lemmy.blahaj.zone

!intersex@lemmy.blahaj.zone


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS