23/02/2025
Comments open on the Federal Register regarding US Gender Marker Changes On Passports.
Anyone can comment. Anyone including persons from the UK, Canada, and even Australia. Please signal boost this, share it around.
Here is an example from a "this will impact your global affairs and tourism industry" point of view:
I am submitting this comment regarding the proposed changes to the Application for a U.S. Passport (DS-11), specifically the decision to replace "gender" with "s*x" and limit applicants to listing only their biological s*x at birth (M or F). As an American, I am deeply concerned about the implications for international travellers, particularly those from countries where gender markers beyond male and female are legally recognised.
Canada, along with many other countries, offers an "X" gender marker on passports to accommodate nonbinary, inters*x, and gender-diverse individuals. These passports are fully valid under International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) standards, meaning travellers should not face any issues when crossing international borders. However, the U.S. government’s decision to reject gender identity and revert solely to "biological s*x" could cause serious travel disruptions for those carrying passports with an "X" designation. These travellers could face increased scrutiny, discrimination, or even denial of entry when attempting to visit the U.S.
The U.S. has already become a less desirable destination for many international visitors due to increasingly restrictive policies, particularly towards marginalised communities. This change would further discourage nonbinary and transgender travellers from visiting and strengthen existing international boycotts against the U.S. from those who oppose these policies. Many nonbinary Canadians, already hesitant to visit the U.S. due to safety concerns, will now have even fewer reasons to consider travelling there if they risk being denied entry or facing challenges at border crossings. This will impact not only tourism and business travel but also academic and cultural exchanges between the U.S. and its closest allies.
This policy contradicts ICAO’s recognition of third-gender markers, creating confusion and inconsistencies in global travel. Other nations, including allies and trade partners, have adopted inclusive gender policies, and by refusing to acknowledge them, the U.S. is isolating itself from global norms and best practices. Moreover, forcing international travellers to present documentation that does not match their legal passports could create issues not just at U.S. borders but at departure points from their home countries, where airlines and immigration officials may hesitate to issue tickets or boarding passes due to mismatched documents.
Rather than reverting to an outdated, exclusionary approach, the State Department should continue recognising "X" markers from international passports in accordance with ICAO guidelines, ensure U.S. border officials receive clear guidance that passports with an "X" designation are valid travel documents, and provide transparency on how these changes will impact international travellers and whether additional requirements will be imposed on those carrying gender-inclusive passports.
This proposed change would not enhance security or streamline travel—it would only alienate international visitors, put trans and nonbinary people at risk, and create legal and bureaucratic challenges at U.S. border crossings. If the U.S. continues to disregard the identity and dignity of nonbinary individuals, it will only push more international travellers to avoid the country entirely. I strongly urge the Department of State to reconsider these changes and align with global best practices.
The Department of State has submitted the information collection described below to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for approval. In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, we are requesting comments on these collections from all interested individuals and organizations....
