Supreme Court Upholds Trump Administration's Passport Policy Against Transgender Individuals

Fri Nov 07 2025 03:09:52 GMT+0200 (Eastern European Standard Time)

The U.S. Supreme Court has allowed the enforcement of a controversial policy that blocks transgender and nonbinary individuals from aligning their passport sex markers with their gender identity, citing the importance of historical accuracy in identifying individuals.

In a recent ruling, the Supreme Court permitted the Trump administration to enforce a passport policy that prevents transgender and nonbinary people from selecting sex markers that match their gender identity. Liberal justices dissented, expressing concerns over increased risks of violence and discrimination against affected individuals. The majority stated that this policy does not violate equal protection principles and is necessary for foreign affairs. This decision has sparked outrage among LGBTQ advocates, highlighting significant ongoing legal battles over transgender rights.

WASHINGTON (Civitas) — The Supreme Court has ruled that the Trump administration may enforce a passport policy that restricts transgender and nonbinary individuals from selecting sex markers on their passports that align with their gender identity. The ruling came Thursday, allowing enforcement of the controversial policy during an ongoing lawsuit.

The court effectively blocked a lower court's order which previously required the government to permit individuals to choose male, female, or an X marker to correspond with their gender identity. The decision was made with a majority of conservative justices in favor, while the three liberal justices dissented, voicing concerns over the policy's implications for the safety of transgender individuals.

In the unsigned order, the Court stated, Displaying passport holders’ sex at birth no more offends equal protection principles than displaying their country of birth, suggesting that the implementation of this policy is merely an affirmation of historical facts.

Liberal dissenters warned that the policy puts transgender individuals at risk of violence and discrimination by potentially outing them during security checks and other situations. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson emphasized that the courts have allowed the perpetuation of harmful policies without proper justification.

This Court has once again paved the way for the immediate infliction of injury without adequate (or, really, any) justification, she commented.

The policy has roots in an executive order by former President Trump, which dismissed transgender identity as false and limited legal recognition to binary gender classifications. The implications of this decision extend to many individuals, such as actor Hunter Schafer, who reported inconsistencies in gender markers on her identification.

Jon Davidson from the ACLU's LGBTQ & HIV project expressed sorrow over the ruling, asserting that it undermines the safety and dignity of transgender individuals. The State Department's new regulations for gender markers on passports began under Biden, contrasting sharply with the current upheaval in policy.

This ruling marks a significant moment in the legal battles surrounding transgender rights, as it reveals the persistent and heated confrontation between sections of the government and LGBTQ advocacy groups.