News and Events => Political and Legal News => Topic started by: Sarah B on November 06, 2025, 05:38:31 PM Return to Full Version
Title: Supreme Court Allows Trump to Mandate Biological Sex on Passports
Post by: Sarah B on November 06, 2025, 05:38:31 PM
Post by: Sarah B on November 06, 2025, 05:38:31 PM
Title: Supreme Court Allows Trump to Mandate Biological Sex on Passports – Liberal Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson Fumes
Link To: Article (https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2025/11/just-supreme-court-allows-trump-mandate-biological-sex/)
Author: Cristina Laila
Date: 06 November 2025
The Supreme Court, in a 6-3 decision on Thursday, allowed President Trump to enforce a new policy that has ended the use of the "X" marker on passports.
President Trump signed an executive order shortly after his inauguration, which directed agencies like the State Department and Homeland Security to issue IDs ... based solely on biological sex assigned at birth.
On Thursday, the Supreme Court upheld the Trump Administration's passport policy and allowed the State Department to mandate biological sex on passports.
"Displaying passport holders' sex at birth no more offends equal protection principles than displaying their country of birth ... the Government is merely attesting to a historical fact without subjecting anyone to differential treatment," the Supreme Court said.
Liberal Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson ... dissented.
"Here, the balance-of-the-equities factor requires weighing the harm to the Government from not being able to proceed immediately with its allegedly unlawful policy against the harm to the individuals who would be subjected to that policy," she added.
"Today's stay allows the government to require citizens to list their biological sex on their passport," Bondi said.
"In other words: there are two sexes and our attorneys will continue fighting for that simple truth," Bondi added..
Best Wishes Always
Sarah B
Global Moderator
Link To: Article (https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2025/11/just-supreme-court-allows-trump-mandate-biological-sex/)
Author: Cristina Laila
Date: 06 November 2025
The Supreme Court, in a 6-3 decision on Thursday, allowed President Trump to enforce a new policy that has ended the use of the "X" marker on passports.
President Trump signed an executive order shortly after his inauguration, which directed agencies like the State Department and Homeland Security to issue IDs ... based solely on biological sex assigned at birth.
On Thursday, the Supreme Court upheld the Trump Administration's passport policy and allowed the State Department to mandate biological sex on passports.
"Displaying passport holders' sex at birth no more offends equal protection principles than displaying their country of birth ... the Government is merely attesting to a historical fact without subjecting anyone to differential treatment," the Supreme Court said.
Liberal Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson ... dissented.
"Here, the balance-of-the-equities factor requires weighing the harm to the Government from not being able to proceed immediately with its allegedly unlawful policy against the harm to the individuals who would be subjected to that policy," she added.
"Today's stay allows the government to require citizens to list their biological sex on their passport," Bondi said.
"In other words: there are two sexes and our attorneys will continue fighting for that simple truth," Bondi added..
Best Wishes Always
Sarah B
Global Moderator
Title: Re: Supreme Court Allows Trump to Mandate Biological Sex on Passports
Post by: Susan on November 06, 2025, 06:18:54 PM
Post by: Susan on November 06, 2025, 06:18:54 PM
The driving force behind this policy is hate and religious bigotry. It is explicitly designed and intended to misgender trans women, causing profound psychological harm. Forcing transgender women to list their so-called "biological sex" on passports amounts to state-sanctioned outing of deeply personal medical history—exposing transgender women to social ostracism, violence, and clearly unconstitutional discrimination.
It also enables an ex post facto application of law and policy, suddenly subjecting us to a reversal of our sex classification for actions, records, and legal statuses that were fully established long before this policy existed.
It is important to note that the concept of "biological sex" did not exist in federal law or policy until the start of the Republican moral panic around 2015–2016, when party leaders began weaponizing the term to justify targeted animus toward transgender people.
For cisgender people, this may seem like a trivial bureaucratic detail. For transgender women—especially those of us who have completed our medical and legal transition—it is an assault on a fundamental human right: the right to establish and maintain our legal identity in our true sex. That right is explicitly recognized in international human-rights instruments such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, both of which the United States has pledged to uphold. Under the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution, these commitments form part of the law of the land and create binding obligations on every branch of government—including the Supreme Court, the State Department, and the presidency.
At the same time, this policy guts the obligations created by the Full Faith and Credit Clause by inviting federal agencies to disregard reissued or amended state documents and valid court orders. These orders already recognize trans women in our true sex. When a state updates its vital records, the federal government has no constitutional authority to override that action, which—under the Tenth Amendment and long-established historical practice—belongs to the states that issue those birth certificates.
For the first time in history, the Court has permitted the federal government to retroactively invalidate human rights, settled law, and both agency and court actions through executive fiat—an act that undermines constitutional protections, international human-rights commitments, and the Full Faith and Credit owed to state judgments and records.
People have the legal and constitutional right to rely on the persistence of these actions beyond the goodwill of this administration or the next. These are real people's lives—lives that should never be subjected to the fickle whims of politics or presidential animus, especially when that animus is grounded in hate and bigotry.
It also enables an ex post facto application of law and policy, suddenly subjecting us to a reversal of our sex classification for actions, records, and legal statuses that were fully established long before this policy existed.
It is important to note that the concept of "biological sex" did not exist in federal law or policy until the start of the Republican moral panic around 2015–2016, when party leaders began weaponizing the term to justify targeted animus toward transgender people.
For cisgender people, this may seem like a trivial bureaucratic detail. For transgender women—especially those of us who have completed our medical and legal transition—it is an assault on a fundamental human right: the right to establish and maintain our legal identity in our true sex. That right is explicitly recognized in international human-rights instruments such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, both of which the United States has pledged to uphold. Under the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution, these commitments form part of the law of the land and create binding obligations on every branch of government—including the Supreme Court, the State Department, and the presidency.
At the same time, this policy guts the obligations created by the Full Faith and Credit Clause by inviting federal agencies to disregard reissued or amended state documents and valid court orders. These orders already recognize trans women in our true sex. When a state updates its vital records, the federal government has no constitutional authority to override that action, which—under the Tenth Amendment and long-established historical practice—belongs to the states that issue those birth certificates.
For the first time in history, the Court has permitted the federal government to retroactively invalidate human rights, settled law, and both agency and court actions through executive fiat—an act that undermines constitutional protections, international human-rights commitments, and the Full Faith and Credit owed to state judgments and records.
People have the legal and constitutional right to rely on the persistence of these actions beyond the goodwill of this administration or the next. These are real people's lives—lives that should never be subjected to the fickle whims of politics or presidential animus, especially when that animus is grounded in hate and bigotry.
Title: Re: Supreme Court Allows Trump to Mandate Biological Sex on Passports
Post by: Lori Dee on November 06, 2025, 06:45:27 PM
Post by: Lori Dee on November 06, 2025, 06:45:27 PM
It may not take too long to identify all the X-marked passports and reissue them.
I wonder how long it will take to review every passport to determine if the marker matches the birth certificate. Mine does, so will they then waste more taxpayer money and effort to track down my old birth certificate to see if it has been changed? And if so, then reissue my passport in violation of a court order? The court order for my legal name change says that I can have my birth certificate reissued, so I did.
All to soothe a baby having a tantrum.
I wonder how long it will take to review every passport to determine if the marker matches the birth certificate. Mine does, so will they then waste more taxpayer money and effort to track down my old birth certificate to see if it has been changed? And if so, then reissue my passport in violation of a court order? The court order for my legal name change says that I can have my birth certificate reissued, so I did.
All to soothe a baby having a tantrum.