Judge blocks Trump administration’s from passport changes affecting transgender Americans

BOSTON AP A federal judge on Friday blocked the Trump administration from enacting a procedures that bans the use of X marker used by multiple nonbinary people on passports as well as the changing of gender markers In an executive order signed in January the president used a narrow definition of the sexes instead of a broader conception of gender The order says a person is male or female and it rejects the idea that someone can transition from the sex assigned at birth to another gender The framing is in line with multiple conservatives views but at odds with major curative groups and policies under former President Joe Biden U S District Judge Julia Kobick who was appointed by President Joe Biden sided with the American Civil Liberties Union s motion for a preliminary injunction which stays the action while the lawsuit plays out The Executive Order and the Passport Strategy on their face classify passport applicants on the basis of sex and thus must be reviewed under intermediate judicial scrutiny Kobick wrote That standard requires the leadership to demonstrate that its actions are substantially related to an vital governmental interest The cabinet has failed to meet this standard The ACLU which sued the Trump administration on behalf of five transgender Americans and two nonbinary plaintiffs mentioned the new procedures would effectively mean transgender nonbinary and intersex Americans could not get an accurate passport We all have a right to accurate identity documents and this framework invites harassment discrimination and violence against transgender Americans who can no longer obtain or renew a passport that matches who they are ACLU lawyer Sruti Swaminathan mentioned In response to the lawsuit the Trump administration argued the passport agenda change does not violate the equal protection guarantees of the Constitution They also contended that the president has broad discretion in setting passport program and that plaintiffs would not be harmed by the protocol since they are still free to journey abroad Source