• About
  • Contact
Tuesday, November 4, 2025
The US Inquirer
No Result
View All Result
  • Login
  • Home
  • National
  • Politics
  • Business
  • Tech
  • Crime
  • World
PRICING
SUBSCRIBE
  • Home
  • National
  • Politics
  • Business
  • Tech
  • Crime
  • World
No Result
View All Result
The US Inquirer
No Result
View All Result
Home Politics

Trump asks Supreme Court to intervene over sex markers on passports

by Melissa Quinn
September 19, 2025
Reading Time: 3 mins read
0
Trump asks Supreme Court to intervene over sex markers on passports

RELATED POSTS

Trump weighs in on New York City mayoral race

Threats increasing against local public servants, new data shows

Washington — The Trump administration on Friday asked the Supreme Court to allow it to enforce for now its policy ending the use of the “X” marker on passports and requiring the documents to reflect the passport-holder’s “biological sex at birth,” changes that affect transgender and nonbinary Americans.

The high court’s emergency appeal seeks to lift a lower court order that prevented the State Department from enforcing the policy, which was put into place after President Trump returned to the White House in January. The court order allowed transgender or nonbinary people seeking passports to self-select the sex designation — “M,” “F” or “X” — that aligns with their gender identity.

The policy from Mr. Trump was a reversal from the Biden administration, which allowed the selection of M, F or X. The X marker was intended for passport applicants who are nonbinary, or those who don’t identify as strictly male or female.

Under an executive order signed by Mr. Trump earlier this year, “sex” was defined as an “individual’s immutable biological classification as either male or female.” It directed the State Department to make changes to require that government-issued documents like passports “accurately reflect the holder’s sex,” effectively prohibiting the government from allowing applicants to choose a sex marker based on their gender identity.

In the wake of that directive, the State Department stopped issuing passports with the X marker and changed applications to offer only the M or F markers. It also adopted procedures for using an applicant’s sex that matches their birth certificate or other documents.

Seven transgender and nonbinary people sued the administration in February over the new passport policy, alleging that the change was unconstitutional and violated federal law. They sought an injunction requiring the State Department to reinstate the Biden administration’s policy as to themselves and allow them to self-attest to their sex, including by selecting the X designation.

U.S. District Judge Julia Kobick granted the request in April and found in part that Mr. Trump’s executive order and passport policy were motivated by animus toward transgender people and violated their right to equal protection under the law.

Kobick, appointed by President Joe Biden, required the Trump administration to process and issue passports for six of the seven plaintiffs consistent with the Biden administration’s policy.

“Viewed as a whole, the language of the Executive Order is candid in its rejection of the identity of an entire group — transgender Americans — who have always existed and have long been recognized in, among other fields, law and the medical profession,” Kobick wrote in her decision. 

The judge later extended her preliminary injunction to cover members of a certified class who are in need of a new passport or need to change their existing document to have its sex designation align with their gender identity.

The Trump administration appealed the decision and sought emergency relief allowing it to enforce its new policy. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 1st Circuit denied that request earlier this month.

In the emergency appeal to the Supreme Court, Solicitor General D. John Sauer argued the passport policy is “eminently lawful.” He argued that the injunction issued by the Boston judge blocking its enforcement compels the Trump administration to “speak to foreign governments in contravention of both the President’s foreign policy and scientific reality.”

“The question is whether the Constitution requires the government to adopt respondents’ preferred definition of sex. It does not,” Sauer wrote.

The U.S. Supreme Court

More


Melissa Quinn

Melissa Quinn is a politics reporter for CBSNews.com. She has written for outlets including the Washington Examiner, Daily Signal and Alexandria Times. Melissa covers U.S. politics, with a focus on the Supreme Court and federal courts.

Share6Tweet4Share1

Melissa Quinn

Related Posts

Trump weighs in on New York City mayoral race
Politics

Trump weighs in on New York City mayoral race

November 3, 2025
Threats increasing against local public servants, new data shows
Politics

Threats increasing against local public servants, new data shows

November 3, 2025
Judge in D.C. sandwich thrower case calls it “the simplest case in the world”
Politics

Judge in D.C. sandwich thrower case calls it “the simplest case in the world”

November 3, 2025
Trump administration will use contingency fund to pay partial SNAP benefits
Politics

Trump administration will use contingency fund to pay partial SNAP benefits

November 3, 2025
Polls tighten as races heat up in New York and New Jersey ahead of Election Day
Politics

Polls tighten as races heat up in New York and New Jersey ahead of Election Day

November 3, 2025
Government shutdown approaches record length
Politics

Government shutdown approaches record length

November 3, 2025
Next Post
Trump administration ending legal status of thousands of Syrians in U.S.

Trump administration ending legal status of thousands of Syrians in U.S.

Federal judge tosses Trump’s lawsuit against NYT, citing excessive length

Federal judge tosses Trump's lawsuit against NYT, citing excessive length

Recommended Stories

Senate set to reconvene on Day 27 of government shutdown

Senate set to reconvene on Day 27 of government shutdown

October 27, 2025
Graham says land strikes in Venezuela are a “real possibility”

Graham says land strikes in Venezuela are a “real possibility”

October 26, 2025
Full transcript of “Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan,” Oct. 5, 2025

Full transcript of “Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan,” Oct. 5, 2025

October 5, 2025

Popular Stories

  • Duffy says airport delays are “going to get worse” as shutdown drags on

    Duffy says airport delays are “going to get worse” as shutdown drags on

    15 shares
    Share 6 Tweet 4
  • Judge in D.C. sandwich thrower case calls it “the simplest case in the world”

    15 shares
    Share 6 Tweet 4
  • Trump calls on Senate GOP to scrap filibuster to end government shutdown

    15 shares
    Share 6 Tweet 4
  • Hospitals seek exemption from new $100,000 visa fee: “We cannot afford that”

    15 shares
    Share 6 Tweet 4
  • Vance set to meet with Senate Republicans amid government shutdown

    15 shares
    Share 6 Tweet 4
The US Inquirer

© 2023 The US Inquirer

Navigate Site

  • Home
  • About
  • Contact
  • Ethics
  • Fact Checking and Corrections Policies
  • Copyright
  • Privacy Policy
  • ISSN: 2832-0522

Follow Us

Welcome Back!

Login to your account below

Forgotten Password?

Retrieve your password

Please enter your username or email address to reset your password.

Log In
No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • National
  • Politics
  • Business
  • Tech
  • Crime
  • World

© 2023 The US Inquirer

Are you sure want to unlock this post?
Unlock left : 0
Are you sure want to cancel subscription?