April 21, 2025
"The passport policy does indeed impose a special disadvantage on the plaintiffs due to their sex and the court therefore concludes that it discriminates on the basis of sex."
Wrote Judge Julia E. Kobick, quoted in "Judge Rules Against Trump Administration on Passport Changes/A group of transgender plaintiffs sued President Trump and the State Department over a new rule prohibiting passports from including a gender different from the sex listed on an original birth certificate" (NYT).
Posts
65 comments:
Due to their delusions
What a load of horseshit.
...that's gonna be a problem for some tony places you wanna use the passport. Don't blame Trump for that you fuckers...
The courts and judges know these rulings are bullshit. They also know that Trump is less than 3 years from being irrelevant and they know they can drag this shit out for 3 years without even lifting a finger.
Our courts and judges are corrupt.
Trump should ignore them, just like Abraham Lincoln did and Abraham Lincoln is on Mt. Rushmore and has the largest statue of any Washington politician sitting on his fat ass that has ever been constructed.
Documents meant to be used to identify people should be based on biological characteristics, not mental illnesses suffered by document holders.
So how many times can you change your sex on a passport? Monthly? Weekly? There obviously is no limit. And there obliviously is also no limit to the number of genders allowed.
"Documents meant to be used to identify people should be based on biological characteristics, not mental illnesses suffered by document holders."
Passports do have a utilitarian purpose that is not served by bending to the fantasies of the holder. IANAL, but I wouldn't be surprised if the passport is not the property of the holder, but rather of the state which issued it.
you go, judge. Make those horrible adhere to the law.
They also know that Trump is less than 3 years from being irrelevant and they know they can drag this shit out for 3 years without even lifting a finger...
...send your next 1,800+ days imagining you lose...again, and the next one is everything you say Trump is now...
Delusional judge issues delusional decision.
I wonder how many of these liberal judges are being paid by outside people to see things their way...
Judges should not enable lies. It’s kind of important.
Oh annie... you're gonna rack up the tips tonight! TWO, count em two tranny posts for the old boys to vent over... What a salon meade runs... lol.
Question: what is even the point of having "Sex" on someone ID?
Seems like this is important information when you are looking for someone's skeletal remains. The whole point of "identification" is to "identify" people. Cramming someone's "gender" onto an ID serves no purpose because it doesn't help anyone identify anyone.
Listing someone's biological sex does assist in identification. Either list sex or list nothing. This is stupid.
Maybe just not issue a passport if a transwoman who was born say as John Roberts or Joseph Robinette Biden shows up and says, List me as a woman". No passport--no problem.
How very non European of the judge.
From Hell, Alinsky smiles, as does Victoria, from charred Pasadena.
Use that passport in Iran, OK?
Original Mike said...
Passports do have a utilitarian purpose that is not served by bending to the fantasies of the holder. IANAL, but I wouldn't be surprised if the passport is not the property of the holder, but rather of the state which issued it.
I thought that was well known.
"22 CFR § 51.7 - Passport property of the U.S. Government.
§ 51.7 Passport property of the U.S. Government.
(a) A passport at all times remains the property of the United States and must be returned to the U.S. Government upon demand."
And true of every other country.
And true in the USA for ALL federal IDs, your military ID, if you have one, employee ID, whatever. Apparently, state governments own your driver's license- or any other form of state issued ID.
And I'm fairly certain if your employer issues IDs- they belong to the employer, not employee.
What is the "special disadvantage" and how does the rule discriminate on the basis of sex?
Make those horrible adhere to the law.
And just what law is that? Be specific.
There's more than just the passport. When a person applies for an entrance visa to another country they have to declare their gender/sex (I don't even know what code word I'm supposed to use). If it doesn't agree with the passport, I imagine complications will ensue. Why would you even want to take on this grief?
"The passport policy does indeed impose a special disadvantage on the plaintiffs due to their sex and the court therefore concludes that it discriminates on the basis of sex."
So…it discriminates against one sex in favor of another? Which is which?
Hawley BLASTS Biden's Nominee for INSANE Anti-2A Stance
https://www.facebook.com/Breitbart/videos/hawley-blasts-bidens-nominee-for-insane-anti-2a-stance/676397300620685/
So the rest of us have to deal with these people's mental illness, and pretend they are something they aren't?? This is ridiculous, and a BIG reason why Democrats are losers.
A passport is supposed to be an identifying document proving (to the extent possible) that you are who you say you are and that the information has been confirmed. One identifier used to confirm is your sex. There is no difference between your sex at birth and what you are now. I can't believe that even judges are buying into this delusion. Although I guess that started with SCOTUS and Kavanaugh's stupid Opinion in Bostock in which he decided that we all had to pretend that "transgenders" were a class of people with extra special civil rights.
If the good judge has ordered that no passports should issue to these people that do not show the "gender" with which they wish to identify, I expect the State Department can oblige the silly bitch. Do they get their application fees refunded?
This tranny shit is mind boggling. Why do we have to confirm the delusions of mentally impaired people? Ten years ago this would have been absurd. But at the end of the day I really don’t give shit what a tranny’s passport says, I know what they are and they can’t take that thought crime away from me.
"The passport policy does indeed impose a special disadvantage on the plaintiffs due to their sex ...". Oh, really? I am a male, and I was able to get a passport. My wife is female, and she got a passport. It would appear that both males and females can get a passport, without any special disadvantage. What is this "sex" that suffers a special disadvantage?
Sex and gender are different except when they are the same.
Passport control in most places likes you to look like your passport picture, and to match up with your description. I had a bit of trouble in Paris because the passport guy didn't think I looked enough like my picture, and I go by the same sex I was born with.
If the DNA's XY - you'll always be a guy. Spackle, paint, HRT, clothes, surgery - it doesn't change just because you don't want to be what you are.
If the DNA's XX - you always be the fairer (ahem) sex. Steroids, testosterone, surgery - you'll never have the muscle mass or physiology.
DNA's the decider. And if your birth cert says 'male' or 'female' and you'd rather it not - well, when you're dug up by archologists in a few hundred years, they'll tell what you were by your bones. Your pronouns or how you identified yourself just won't be considered.
If there was an severe accident, body identification would be impossible, because you can only detect sex from mutilated bodies.
The judiciary apparently wants to trash the institution. What the fuck are these jackals in robes thinking?!?!
I would simply instruct the passport office to leave it blank. This would place the burden on the mentally ill passport holder to explain and make his case to every foreign passport control officer.
Another poorly educated Biden judge.
I identify as a diplomat.
"The passport policy does indeed impose a special disadvantage on the plaintiffs due to their sex and the court therefore concludes that it discriminates on the basis of sex."
Are we talking about sex or gender? A person that has had a sex change operation does not become a member of the opposite sex. They remain only an approximation, a surgically-altered person of their biological birth sex, that now resembles a person of the opposite sex - the quality of which deception depends upon the skill of the surgeon.
If it’s a trait that one can change at any time, it does not belong on an ID. This is simply insane and thumb in the eye of nature.
Are we talking about sex or gender?
That is what stuck out to me from the quote. I recall people making arguments that sex was sex and gender was different, a social construct. That is why the supreme court weighed in to add gender to one of the non- discrimination bills recently. This judge appears to be conflating the two in an effort to make the round peg of gender fit in to the square hole of sex. Probably a bad metaphor, given the context... but you all get my drift.
I guess we now need the supreme court to define gender and sex for us as they apply to the constitution when evaluating governmental action. Would that require the recusal of Jackson as she self affirmed her ignorance of the subject?
Passport story: My wife renewed her passport last year. The new one had all her information correct except it contained the picture of a middle-aged man.
I guessed if she said that she identified as that man, all would have been good.
Let 'em have what they want. Just charge them a lot of money for it and delay delivery for long enough to screw up their travel plans, darn the luck. Kinda like what the passport office does now.
If they have a dick... their sex is male.. if they have a pussy their sex is female... THERE IS NO INBETWEEN... NO TRANS... NO NOTHING. All else is bullshit.
If sex = gender why are there different words for the two? Sex is XX vs XY plus some anomalous combinations. Gender seems to be anything you may want it to be. The listing of the LGBT+ (I can't even remember the full sequence) is incomplete as furries, dogs, cat, fish, or whatever you decide you are is left out. Would a judge allow me to list my gender as Bugs Bunny if I felt it was harmful to me if everyone else didn't recognize it?
"I guess we now need the supreme court to define gender and sex for us as they apply to the constitution when evaluating governmental action...."
I hope Justice Jackson has been doing her biology homework.
I would prefer sex perverts to act normal any time they are out in public, not just in airports.
The Supreme Court of the United Kingdom took a case deriving from a lawsuit and ruled that the word woman is defined as an adult human being of the female sex, thereby knocking the props from under the woke insanity that has plagued Western Civilization for a generation. This intrusion of the Judiciary into rightful and constitutional prerogatives of the Chief Executive is perfectly sound for this nation's Supreme Court.
Get it settled and let the freaks and perverts cry us a river.
There was a case in the UK of a man who was tried and convicted of several counts of forcible rape.When it came to sentencing he asserted that he was a woman, notwithstanding all the evidence to the contrary. The judge sentenced him to time in a women's prison. This was one of the things that set off the women's movement in Scotland to bring the case before the UK supreme court.
This Judge had TDA living in his Casita, with guns.
https://www.coffeeandcovid.com/p/habeas-corpses-monday-april-21-2025
So let's solve this by requiring actual sex of the holder, and their imagined gender. So it could say: Leslie Doe. Male, Female.
US Passports list sex, not gender. Perhaps we could include a third "sex" for those surgically altered, something like "eunuch?"
Wikipedia: "A passport is an official travel document issued by a government that certifies a person's identity and nationality for international travel."
Any change should not reduce the passport's effectiveness at the above job. Is the US the only nation having this "problem"?
If the passport's job is to certify a person's identity and nationality for international travel, perhaps we should just implant microchips at birth like we do with our dogs and cats and other valuables.
Judge Kobick has her moment of fame, expects to receive Act Blue contributions at her next election campaign.
Legal documents should be based upon chromosonal evidence, not nihilistic LGBTQX propoganda.
Another "art project" would be to just think up a gender or ethnic or orientation category and promote it to such a degree that the world is forced to acknowledge it. This was already done when people asked about their religion by pollsters and census takers started responding "Jedi" or "Jedi Knight." The next step would be getting courts to take note of discrimination against "Jedi Knights," and businesses to aggressively recruit them, and foundations to study "anti-Jedi" activities and groups.
How does having sex on the form help the identification process? Either the stated sex matches the picture and the person, in which case it doesn't really help. Or it doesn't, in which case it really doesn't help and only works to confuse the examiner. Leave sex off entirely. The examiner can then compare the pic with the person standing in front of him.
These political judges are creating a constitutional crisis. It needs to be addressed NOW. The US now has two very real govenrments at war with each other.
Can a judge be charged with a crime? Do it. Nice little country we have here - judges acting as legislators and executives are pissing it all away.
Sex is genetic: male and female. Gender refers to sex-correlated attributes (e.g. sexual orientation): masculine and feminine. Trans- refers to a state or process of divergence. Persons in drag are transsocial. Incest, pedophilia, sadomasochism, etc are legal under Democratic law
Maybe we need a new term, "genetic sex"
"Male at Birth / Presents Otherwise"
Solved!
The judiciary is hell bent on torching its legitimacy.
Biometric passports are about one smart federal congresscritter away from becoming a reality, with retina scans, fingerprints, genetic markers and your entire family tree available via your ID document and readily available to prove identity beyond any doubt. Fortunately, smart federal congresscritters seem to be an extreme rarity these days. So Gattaca is not yet upon us. Sometime soon, though, as even regular congresscritters can be fed ideas by smart staffers.
Leave sex off entirely. The examiner can then compare the pic with the person standing in front of him.
I'm sure there are wrinkles I'm not thinking of, such as the mangling accident that destroys the person's face but not skeleton and leaves only the passport at the scene for ID ("Well, this document says Lilly Golightly is female, and this is clearly the pelvic girdle of a male, so we need to put out a BOLO for Ms. Golightly - she could be seriously injured"), but... I could actually see this.
Has anyone seen what the disadvantage is said to be? Does it have to do with trying to pass in a country where being gay or trans is a crime? Because - I want to see statistics, based on large(ish, given the sample size) scale studies, about the percentage of trans people who can actually pass so effectively that they're not already in jeopardy right now. I myself avoid countries where an uncovered head marks me as an infidel; if I were gay (and inclined to show it, so to speak) or trans, I'd sure as heck steer clear of countries where my quotidian presentation could get me thrown into jail. But we aren't in a position to stop those countries from enforcing their own laws, however benighted.
So - on a US passport, which is required to prove US citizenship upon entering the US (any use of a US passport for ID overseas is dependent on the laws of the other country, isn't it?), is the disadvantage just that the person may have to carry extra documentation as to why the passport says M but the person is in a dress? Because again, how many trans people really effectively pass? Politeness makes many of us go along with the presentation even though we're not fooled, and the examiner would be looking at the person's chosen picture, which presumably matches the person's presentation, as jim5301 suggests.
This judge is trying to order and enforce judicially a mandate not available in law because it is not available in reality. The more obvious the lie, the more force it has on the populace when they must act as if it is true. How about we ignore gender on passports and put XX or XY for identification purposes, and XXY, etc, for those with genetic outliers? No judgement there, just reality.
We’ve got to do a better job of vetting federal judicial nominees as it is clear that the current system has facilitated confirmation of a number of judges who are irresponsible ideologues who are hell bent to do as they please.
Post a Comment
Please use the comments forum to respond to the post. Don't fight with each other. Be substantive... or interesting... or funny. Comments should go up immediately... unless you're commenting on a post older than 2 days. Then you have to wait for us to moderate you through. It's also possible to get shunted into spam by the machine. We try to keep an eye on that and release the miscaught good stuff. We do delete some comments, but not for viewpoint... for bad faith.