Federal Court to Consider Preliminary Injunction Against Trump’s Discriminatory Passport Policy

March 24, 2025 9:31 am

Media Contact
125 Broad Street
18th Floor
New York, NY 10004
United States

BOSTON – Tomorrow, a federal district court will hear arguments from attorneys representing transgender and nonbinary Americans impacted by a new State Department policy requiring US passports to reflect their sex assigned at birth, rolling back decades of State Department policy.

What: Orr v. Trump Preliminary Injunction Hearing

When: Tuesday, March 25 10:00 a.m. Eastern

Where: US District Court for the District of Massachusetts (Boston, MA)

Press Availability:

When the hearing concludes, attorneys will be available for questions outside the District Court building (near the intersection of Northern Avenue and Courthouse Way).

The hearing will not be livestreamed but is open to the public in-person. According to the District Court’s website, attendance is limited to the capacity of the courtroom and an overflow room on a first-come-first-serve basis. Please refer to the District Court’s guidance for members of the media.

“Even before Donald Trump was inaugurated, it was clear to me he wanted to control the lives and identities of transgender people like myself,” said Ash Lazarus Orr, transgender West Virginian and title plaintiff in Orr v. Trump. “Like many others, I rushed to update my passport hoping I could get an accurate version. Now, the State Department has suspended my application and withheld all my documents from me, including my passport, my birth certificate, and even my marriage license. I’m hopeful the court will see this discriminatory policy for what is and prevent even more people from having their lives disrupted and their freedom threatened by this administration.”

“The policy we’re challenging in this case is openly discriminatory and animated by a transparent desire to drive transgender people out of public life altogether,” said Li Nowlin-Sohl, Staff Attorney for the ACLU’s LGBTQ & HIV Project, who will be presenting arguments before the court on Tuesday. “Our clients rely on their passports to travel abroad for work, for school, and to see family abroad, and the administration has put forward no reasonable justification for rolling back decades of policy and disrupting the lives of thousands of people across the country. We’re hopeful the court will agree that transgender, nonbinary, and intersex people are entitled to the same freedom we all deserve—the freedom to be ourselves without fear.”

“The new passport policy threatens to expose transgender people to violence, harassment, and discrimination in nearly every element of public life: while flying, opening bank accounts, enrolling in school, and more,” said Jessie Rossman, legal director at the ACLU of Massachusetts. “We’re challenging this policy because every person deserves the right to move freely about the world safely and with dignity."

On his first day in office in January 2025, Trump signed an executive order attempting to mandate discrimination against transgender people across the federal government and government programs. This included a directive to the Departments of State and Homeland Security “to require that government-issued identification documents, including passports, visas, and Global Entry cards” reflect their sex “at conception.” Under the ensuing Passport Policy, within 48 hours the State Department began holding some passports and other documents (such as birth certificates and court orders) submitted by transgender, intersex, and nonbinary people who had applied to update the sex designation on their U.S. passports and returning others with their applications rejected and their newly-issued passport marked with their sex assigned at birth.

In February 2025, the American Civil Liberties Union and the ACLU of Massachusetts filed Orr v. Trump on behalf of seven people who have not been able to obtain passports that match their identities because of the State Department’s new Passport Policy or are likely to be impacted by the new policy upon their next renewal. The complaint was filed in the federal District Court for the District of Massachusetts.


Learn More About the Issues in This Press Release