The US Supreme Court Upholds Passport Policy Based on Biological Sex at Birth. In a controversial decision, the US Supreme Court has granted approval for the Trump administration to enforce a policy requiring that all US passport applicants be identified by their biological sex at birth, rather than by their chosen gender identity. This ruling marks another setback for the transgender and nonbinary community, further intensifying debates surrounding equality, recognition, and individual rights.
According to reports, the ruling reflects the stance of the conservative-leaning court, which currently includes three justices appointed by former President Donald Trump. Critics argue that this decision undermines years of progress made toward gender inclusivity in government documentation. The court’s order allows the administration’s passport rule to remain effective while ongoing legal battles continue in lower courts.
Shortly after assuming office in January, President Trump issued an executive order that redefined gender recognition under federal policy. The directive declared that only two categories of gender — male and female — would be acknowledged, eliminating the option of a third gender designation. As a result, the US State Department is now mandated to record only the biological sex at birth of passport holders, denoted by “M” or “F.”
This policy reversed earlier changes made under President Joe Biden’s administration, which had introduced passports featuring an “X” gender marker for individuals who identify as nonbinary, intersex, or gender non-conforming. The biological sex at birth rule effectively revoked this recognition, igniting backlash from human rights advocates and civil liberties organizations.
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) quickly challenged the administration’s decision, filing a lawsuit on behalf of affected citizens. A lower district court initially ordered the State Department to resume issuing “X” passports, ruling that the ban violated constitutional protections. However, after the Trump administration appealed, the Justice Department sought an emergency stay from the Supreme Court. In a short, unsigned order, the Supreme Court granted that request, allowing the policy to remain in place temporarily.
The justices supporting the decision argued that listing an individual’s biological sex at birth does not constitute discrimination, comparing it to displaying one’s country of birth on a passport. According to the ruling, the government is merely affirming an objective historical fact and not engaging in unequal treatment. Yet, this reasoning was met with strong opposition from the three liberal justices on the nine-member bench, who issued a sharp dissent emphasizing the policy’s impact on personal identity and dignity.
Jon Davidson, senior counsel at the ACLU, denounced the ruling as a “devastating setback” for transgender and nonbinary Americans. He asserted that the fight for identity recognition would continue, expressing deep disappointment in the Court’s endorsement of what he described as an attack on constitutional freedom. “This is a heartbreaking decision that strikes at the core of individual self-determination,” Davidson said, vowing that advocacy groups would persist in challenging the policy until it is overturned.
The Biden administration had initially introduced the “X” gender marker in October 2021 to foster inclusivity and respect for diverse gender identities. However, the reinstatement of the biological sex at birth rule represents a major rollback of that progress and echoes Trump’s earlier executive order banning transgender individuals from serving in the US military — a policy the Supreme Court also allowed to stand while litigation continued.
Advocates fear that this decision could set a troubling precedent, granting future administrations broader authority to impose restrictive gender policies under the guise of administrative consistency. For many, the insistence on recording biological sex at birth on passports symbolizes not merely a bureaucratic choice but a deeper struggle over recognition, respect, and human rights in America.