Reversing Two Restrictive Policies, Illinois Issues Accurate Birth Certificates To Three Transgender Persons
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
CONTACT: (212) 549-2666; media@aclu.org
CHICAGO – In an important reversal of two policies restricting who can obtain accurate birth certificates after sex reassignment surgery, the state of Illinois has issued new, accurate birth certificates to three transgender persons born in Illinois. All three individuals had been denied birth certificates with the correct gender listed on the documents and are challenging the denials in an ACLU lawsuit against the state. Two persons were denied because they chose a surgeon who practiced overseas and was not licensed in the United States. The third plaintiff was denied because the Department required surgery that was not medically necessary for him.
“I am a woman and now I have a birth certificate that reflects this reality,” said Victoria Kirk, one of the plaintiffs in the lawsuit who recently received a corrected birth certificate. “To see that the state of Illinois now – officially – recognizes this transition, and that I’ll never have to fear embarrassment in those circumstances where I present the birth certificate, is a welcome change. I am pleased to see the state make this policy shift.”
A new policy adopted by the Illinois Department of Vital Records now permits many transgender individuals in Illinois and across the nation to receive a new birth certificate that reflects their accurate gender following sex reassignment surgery overseas. The Department has also announced that it will formulate new standards for determining how much surgery will be required before a transgender person will be provided a birth certificate listing the correct gender marker.
For more than four decades, Illinois permitted individuals who have sex reassignment surgery to change the gender “marker” on an original birth certificate. Earlier this decade, the Department’s Division of Vital Records started interpreting the relevant law to provide the option of changing the birth certificate only if an individual had the surgery performed by a United States licensed physician. This change in policy created an unnecessary and unfair burden for the growing number of persons who select a surgeon from Europe, South America or Asia, including two women on whose behalf the ACLU of Illinois sued in January 2009. In addition, the Department started in about 2004 to require those female-to-male transgender persons who request an accurate birth certificate to complete surgery for which the vast majority of applicants have no medical need, nor a desire to complete.
The ACLU tried for several years to persuade the state to change its practices prior to pursuing relief in court. Since the ACLU filed suit, the state finally reversed itself and changed its policy so that those who have sex reassignment surgery abroad can secure a new, accurate birth certificate. Celebrating the change in policy and the positive development for its clients, the ACLU again noted today that the lack of an accurate gender marker on a birth certificate creates unnecessary and dangerous challenges to persons who have undergone sex reassignment surgery, and is antithetical to the advice of medical experts who recommend that persons who undergo sex reassignment ensure that all aspects of their lives reflect their gender identity.
“We remain committed to the notion that a birth certificate should be accurate and complete,” said John Knight, a lawyer who works for the ACLU of Illinois and the ACLU LGBT Project. “We are pleased that the Division of Vital Records Act has adjusted its policy to ensure that our clients who chose surgeons who practice overseas have accurate documents and will take a new look at its policy regarding the types of surgery required.”
The latest policy shift also recognizes the large number of persons who seek sex reassignment surgery overseas. A decision about which surgeon to use is made for a variety of reasons, including reputation of the surgeon, available follow-up care, surgical techniques and cost of the procedure. For many persons electing to have sex reassignment surgery, a foreign surgeon is the safest and best option.
The Department’s announcement that it will revise its policy regarding the surgery required prior to issuing an amended birth certificate to transgender persons is a move in the right direction, since each person’s sex reassignment process is different and depends on important personal choices and individualized medical judgment. The old rule conflicted with transgender individuals’ fundamental right to make choices about their medical treatment in consultation with their doctors.
“We will continue to monitor the state’s rules for birth certificate gender marker changes and will advocate for a surgery policy that allows transgender persons to seek accurate birth certificates without undergoing medical treatment that they do not want and do not need,”said Knight.
The plaintiffs in the lawsuit were represented by lawyers from the American Civil Liberties Union of Illinois, the American Civil Liberties Union Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual Transgender Project in New York and pro bono counsel from the Chicago office of Jenner & Block. Because of the shift in policy by the Department of Vital Records, a Cook County Judge is expected to dismiss the ACLU of Illinois lawsuit, after a number of procedural issues are resolved this month.
LGBTQ Rights
Kirk v. Arnold
LGBTQ Rights
Kirk v. Arnold
Learn More About the Issues in This Press Release
-
Press ReleaseDec 2024
LGBTQ Rights
President Biden Must Veto Defense Bill Attacking Military Families with Transgender YouthPresident Biden Must Veto Defense Bill Attacking Military Families with Transgender Youth
WASHINGTON — The U.S. Senate today passed a version of the National Defense Authorization Act that would ban coverage for gender-affirming care for transgender youth whose parents are active-duty military personnel. The American Civil Liberties Union is opposing final passage of the defense bill over the inclusion of this health care ban and calling on President Joe Biden to veto the bill. Section 708 of the NDAA would prohibit insurance coverage for “medical interventions for the treatment of gender dysphoria” such as hormone therapy and puberty-suppressant medications, which Speaker Mike Johnson says would “permanently ban transgender medical treatment for minors.” The same treatments would be covered by TRICARE for any medical purpose other than treating gender dysphoria, the clinical diagnosis for the psychological distress experienced by transgender people related to their gender identity. “By passing this bill, the House and Senate are forcing thousands of active-duty service members to choose between their careers in the military and the future of their transgender children,” said Mike Zamore, national director of policy & government affairs at the ACLU. “This unconscionable and unjustifiable attack on those families stands in direct contrast to President Joe Biden’s legacy of defending the civil rights of transgender Americans — including when few in his own party showed the courage to do so. President Biden should cement his legacy by vetoing this bill and sending it back to Congress to pass without Speaker Johnson’s last minute health care ban for servicemembers’ kids.” If signed by President Biden, this health care ban would be the first new anti-LGBTQ provision enacted by Congress and signed into law by the president since the enactment of the military’s since-repealed “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy for LGBTQ servicemembers and the since-repealed federal law barring recognition of same-sex marriages known as the Defense of Marriage Act. It is unknown how many transgender youth are currently enrolled in TRICARE or how many of those enrolled are currently receiving coverage for gender-affirming care. In one 2022 analysis, 2,500 minor patients sought care for gender dysphoria through TRICARE Prime insurance at military or civilian treatment facilities in 2017, and 900 received puberty suppressants or gender-affirming hormones. Earlier this month, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in a landmark case brought by the ACLU, the ACLU of Tennessee, Lambda Legal, and Akin Gump on behalf of three families and a medical provider challenging a Tennessee ban on gender-affirming hormonal therapies for transgender youth on the grounds the ban violates the Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution. -
Press ReleaseDec 2024
LGBTQ Rights
Montana Court Blocks State From Refusing to Correct Sex Markers on Transgender People's Birth Certificates and Driver's LicensesMontana Court Blocks State From Refusing to Correct Sex Markers on Transgender People's Birth Certificates and Driver's Licenses
HELENA, Mont. – A Montana court has granted a preliminary injunction preventing the state of Montana from enforcing policies that bar transgender people from obtaining accurate sex designations on their birth certificates and driver’s licenses. After a prior restriction on amendments of birth certificates was struck down by the courts, in early 2024 the state of Montana enacted a new rule that categorically bars transgender Montanans from correcting the sex designation on their birth certificates. Around the same time, the Montana Department of Justice adopted a policy similarly restricting amendment of driver’s licenses. The plaintiffs challenged these policies in state district court, arguing that they violate various constitutional provisions, including the right to equal protection of the law. In a recent Montana Supreme Court decision, two justices concluded that discrimination on the basis of transgender status – as the state is engaging in here – is a form of sex discrimination that violates the Montana Constitution’s equal protection clause. The plaintiffs, two transgender women, are represented by the American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU of Montana, and Nixon Peabody LLP. Plaintiff Jessica Kalarchik, a veteran who served in the United States Army for 31 years, said: “After finally being able to live my life openly as the woman I know myself to be, I am frustrated that my birth state, Montana, wants me to carry around a birth certificate that incorrectly lists my sex as male. I live my life openly as a woman, I am treated as a woman in my daily life, and there is no reason I should be forced to carry a birth certificate that incorrectly identifies me as male. Fortunately, the court agrees that this ridiculous policy should not be in effect.” “Once again the State of Montana chose to adopt a draconian policy that is clearly intended to marginalize transgender Montanans, only for that discriminatory action to be blocked by the courts,” said Akilah Deernose, executive director for the ACLU of Montana. “Here in Montana we treasure our right to privacy and to live our lives free from governmental intrusion. The State of Montana clearly has not learned any lessons from the past few years, where courts have repeatedly struck down unconstitutional laws targeting transgender Montanans.” “Forcing anyone to carry documents that contradict their identity unjustly violates their rights to privacy, equal treatment, and not being compelled to convey a government message about their sex that they disagree with,” said Malita Picasso, staff attorney for the ACLU’s LGBTQ & HIV Project. “Such a policy marks transgender people for further mistreatment and discrimination, essentially requiring them to carry papers that out them as transgender any time they need to provide identity documents. Fortunately, the court has refused to allow the state of Montana to subvert the freedom of transgender Montanans to control their own identity as this case goes forward.” In granting the plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction, the court held, “[i]f the challenged state actions discriminate against transgender individuals on the basis of their transgender status, they also necessarily discriminate the basis of sex.” The state has the option of appealing the district court’s ruling to the Montana Supreme Court, but the underlying case will proceed in district court. A trial has not yet been scheduled. -
FloridaDec 2024
LGBTQ Rights
Keohane v. DixonKeohane v. Dixon
On September 30, 2024, the Florida Department of Corrections rescinded its policy regarding treatment of gender dysphoria, which allowed for hormone therapy when deemed medically necessary, as well as access to clothing and grooming standards that accord with one’s gender identity. Under this new policy, grooming and clothing accommodations have been stripped away, and hormone therapy is not permitted unless an exception is deemed constitutionally required. The ACLU brought a class action challenging the policy. -
IdahoDec 2024
LGBTQ Rights
Robinson v. LabradorRobinson v. Labrador
Two incarcerated transgender women have sued the state of Idaho alleging that HB 688, a 2024 law barring state funding for gender-affirming medical care for transgender people, denies them access to the health care their doctors have prescribed for them and is a violation of their Eighth Amendment right to be free from cruel and unusual punishment. They represent a class of all incarcerated folks within the state of Idaho who face the loss of hormone therapy due to HB 668.