Representative Chip Roy of Texas has reintroduced the ‘Passport Sanity Act,’ aiming to ensure that U.S. passports reflect only the biological sexes of male and female. This legislation would prohibit the State Department from issuing passports or Consular Reports of Birth Abroad that include an unspecified ‘X’ gender designation.
Roy’s bill mandates that applications for these documents offer only the options of male or female, effectively sidelining non-binary or gender-nonconforming individuals seeking federal recognition on their travel papers.
The congressman first introduced this bill in 2022, expressing concerns that passports were being used to promote what he termed ‘radical gender ideology.’ He argued that passports should serve national security interests by accurately identifying individuals, rather than accommodating evolving gender identities.
“There are only two sexes—male and female—and that’s what official government documents should reflect.”
“Passports exist to serve our national security by verifying the identity of those who exit and reenter our country; they do not exist to undermine reality.”
The State Department, under the previous administration, had begun allowing U.S. citizens to select ‘X’ as their gender marker on passport applications, a move celebrated by LGBTQ+ advocates as a step toward inclusivity. This policy change permitted applicants to self-select their gender identity without the need for medical documentation, even if it differed from other government records.
Critics of Roy’s bill argue that it disregards the identities of non-binary and gender-nonconforming individuals, potentially subjecting them to challenges when traveling internationally. They contend that the inclusion of an ‘X’ gender marker is a simple yet significant acknowledgment of the diverse spectrum of human identity. Supporters of the bill, however, maintain that official documents should be grounded in biological fact, not personal identification.
They express concerns that introducing a non-specific gender option could complicate security protocols and undermine the clarity that passports are intended to provide. The debate over gender markers on passports is part of a broader national conversation about the recognition of gender identity in government documentation.
As societal understandings of gender continue to evolve, policymakers are grappling with how to balance inclusivity with traditional definitions. Roy’s reintroduction of the ‘Passport Sanity Act’ underscores the ongoing tension between these perspectives.
As the bill moves forward, it is poised to become a flashpoint in the cultural discourse surrounding gender identity, government recognition, and the role of official documentation in reflecting—or resisting—social change.
