Hunter Schafer Says Passport Lists Wrong Gender After Trump Policy Change

Dive Right Into

Key Takeaways

• A January 20, 2025 executive order mandates U.S. passports reflect “sex at conception,” limiting updates for transgender individuals.
• The ACLU filed a federal lawsuit on February 7, 2025, citing harm to seven plaintiffs under the new policy.
• Over 1,500 transgender individuals reported delays or denials, with advocacy groups advising caution on gender marker updates.

Hunter Schafer, a 26-year-old transgender actress best known for her role in the HBO series “Euphoria,” recently shared her frustration with a change in her updated U.S. passport’s gender marker. Despite selecting “female” on her application form, her newly issued passport lists her gender as “male.” Schafer connected this unexpected change to a recent executive order signed by President Trump on January 20, 2025. This order requires all government-issued documents, including passports, to reflect a person’s sex “at conception,” essentially rolling back the ability of transgender and nonbinary individuals to select their gender identity on official documents.

The Executive Order and Its Immediate Consequences

Hunter Schafer Says Passport Lists Wrong Gender After Trump Policy Change

President Trump’s executive order explicitly states that the federal government will recognize only two sexes, male and female, and that these identities are defined by “an incontrovertible biological reality.” The State Department, which oversees U.S. passports, quickly implemented this policy after it was announced. By January 21, 2025, it began holding back applications for individuals seeking to update their gender markers or renewals that reflected a gender identity different from their sex at birth. Some applications were outright denied, and new passports were issued only with sex designations matching the applicant’s birth certificate or other official records tied to their birth sex.

In Schafer’s case, she explained in a heartfelt social media video that her gender marker had been listed as female on all prior passports since her teenage years, which matched her legal documentation, including her driver’s license. However, after misplacing her passport while working in Barcelona last year, she applied for a replacement. What happened next was a stark shift. The State Department appears to have implemented additional measures to cross-check birth certificates, and Schafer, who had not updated hers, was issued a passport with “male” as her gender marker.

This new policy marks a dramatic turn from previous practices. In recent years, including much of Trump’s first presidential term, individuals were generally permitted to adjust the sex designation on their passports to align with their gender identity without having to meet extensive requirements. In fact, the Biden administration had gone a step further by issuing a landmark 2022 policy to simplify this process. That policy even introduced a third gender marker option, “X,” to allow intersex, transgender, and nonbinary Americans greater flexibility. Now, however, the new rules under Trump’s administration have upended that progress, leaving many in the transgender community uncertain about their ability to access accurate and affirming identification documents moving forward.

Legal and Personal Implications

This policy has triggered numerous legal and social challenges almost from the moment it went into effect. Just weeks after the executive order was signed, legal advocacy groups joined forces to contest the change. On February 7, 2025, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), the ACLU of Massachusetts, and the law firm Covington & Burling LLP filed a lawsuit in federal court on behalf of seven plaintiffs. Each plaintiff claims they were directly harmed by the reversal, with several unable to obtain a passport that corresponds to their affirmed gender identity.

Reid Solomon-Lane, one of the individuals participating in the lawsuit, voiced their fears about holding a passport that lists inaccurate information. Having accurate identification is not just a matter of personal preference—it protects individuals from harassment, discrimination, and even physical danger, especially when traveling internationally. A mismatch in gender markers could result in forced outings or being denied entry into certain countries, both of which put the safety of transgender travelers at great risk.

The ACLU has noted a sharp rise in reports from transgender Americans who have seen their applications delayed, suspended, or outright denied under the latest policy. More than 1,500 individuals reportedly reached out to the organization shortly after the executive order’s implementation, expressing various difficulties and fears about securing proper documentation. These challenges extend beyond passports, as evidenced by reports that the Social Security Administration has also stopped updating gender markers in its records as of January 31, 2025. This trend has been mirrored by individual states, where gender marker updates on driver’s licenses and birth certificates have been increasingly restricted or abolished entirely.

The Role of Advocacy

The backlash to these policies has been swift and relatively unified. LGBTQ+ advocacy groups, public figures like Hunter Schafer, and even lawmakers have all stepped forward to express their discontent. A bicameral group of representatives, led by Rep. Kevin Mullin of California, sent a strongly worded letter to Secretary of State Marco Rubio on February 12, 2025, urging the State Department to reverse course. The group argued that this policy unfairly and unconstitutionally targets transgender, intersex, and nonbinary Americans without serving any legitimate government interest.

Meanwhile, legal experts and activists have emphasized the importance of understanding the deeper ramifications of these new federal directives. Lambda Legal, a nonprofit focused on LGBTQ+ rights, has put together guidelines advising individuals about how to handle gender marker updates under the current climate. For example, they recommend delaying applications unless necessary and seeking legal advice when considering changes to official identification. These steps have been crucial in helping individuals make informed choices, even as the legal challenges against the current policies remain unresolved.

Hunter Schafer’s Perspective

As one of the more recognizable public figures caught up in these changes, Hunter Schafer has used her platform to highlight the emotional and practical consequences of having mismatched identification. In her online statement, Schafer was frank about her feelings: “I don’t give a [expletive] that they put an ‘M’ on my passport. It doesn’t change really anything about me or my transness.” However, she acknowledged the very real stakes for others in her community. For many transgender and nonbinary individuals, the inability to present consistent documentation can lead to uncomfortable questions at best and life-threatening situations at worst.

Schafer went on to highlight just how difficult it was to see years of incremental progress rolled back with the quick stroke of a pen. She expressed concern about being forced to out herself repeatedly to officials, particularly when traveling between countries, something she believes will now be unavoidable given her situation. Still, her message emphasized resilience. Schafer encouraged her followers to focus on the enduring beauty and strength of the transgender community, regardless of external pressures.

The ripple effects of this executive order and the new passport policy cannot be understated. For transgender people, accurate identification is a cornerstone of living a dignified and secure life. Yet the new policy reintroduces systemic barriers for one of society’s most vulnerable groups, leaving many uncertain about how to ensure their safety and identity are respected.

These changes also raise broader concerns about equal treatment under the law. Critics argue that the policy’s focus on transgender individuals reflects a broader attempt to restrict their rights without offering clear explanations or benefits for these reversals, as noted by advocacy groups and lawmakers. The sudden and disruptive nature of the rollback adds to its controversy, leading to an environment where anxiety and legal confusion abound.

Looking Forward

At this moment, the legal challenges to President Trump’s executive order are still pending. Advocacy groups have pledged to closely track developments and provide resources to help people adapt to the shifting landscape. Those affected are encouraged to remain informed, seek legal assistance where possible, and carefully weigh the best course of action given their unique circumstances.

For people like Schafer and others in the transgender community, the road ahead is likely to remain tough, but their collective voices continue to bring attention to the struggles and triumphs of those fighting for recognition and equality. As reported by VisaVerge.com, this critical issue remains the focus of intense legal, political, and social debates—a sign that this story is far from over.

For more official guidance on passport requirements, visit the U.S. State Department’s passport information page.

Learn Today

Gender Marker → A designation on official documents indicating a person’s gender, such as male, female, or nonbinary.
Executive Order → A directive issued by the U.S. president managing operations of the federal government, often with significant legal and policy impact.
Affirmed Gender Identity → An individual’s self-recognized and lived gender, which may differ from the gender assigned at birth.
Advocacy Group → An organized group working to influence public policy and raise awareness about specific social, political, or legal issues.
Misgendering → Using incorrect gender terms or identities, potentially causing emotional harm and misrepresentation, especially for transgender or nonbinary individuals.

This Article in a Nutshell

Hunter Schafer’s passport ordeal reflects a stark rollback of transgender rights. President Trump’s 2025 executive order mandates documents list sex “at conception,” forcing mismatches for many. Schafer’s experience amplifies fears—travel risks, forced outings, and systemic discrimination. Advocacy groups and lawsuits aim to challenge these policies, underscoring the fight for equality and recognition.
— By VisaVerge.com