Trump Signs Executive Orders Recognizing Only Two Biological Sexes, Ending Diversity Programs

In a significant policy shift, former President Donald Trump signed two executive orders on Monday, declaring that the U.S. government will officially recognize only two biological sexes—male and female—and eliminating diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs within federal agencies.

Restoring "Biological Truth"

As part of what his administration is calling the “Restoring Sanity” agenda, Trump’s first executive order focuses on enforcing a strict interpretation of biological sex across all government operations. The order mandates that federal agencies use the term “sex” instead of “gender” in official documents, including passports and visas. Additionally, it directs the State Department and the Department of Homeland Security to ensure these documents accurately reflect an individual's biological sex.

This marks a reversal of a 2022 policy under the Biden administration that allowed U.S. citizens to select a gender-neutral “X” marker on passports. Trump’s order also restricts federal funds from being used for gender-transition-related healthcare and includes provisions to enhance “privacy in intimate spaces” in places like prisons, migrant shelters, and rape crisis centers.

Ending DEI Programs

The second executive order seeks to dismantle DEI initiatives within federal agencies, describing them as “radical and wasteful.” Trump’s administration intends to eliminate programs it views as discriminatory, including environmental justice initiatives and equity-based grant systems. Monthly meetings with deputy secretaries of key agencies will be held to identify and dismantle existing DEI programs.

During his inaugural address, Trump emphasized the importance of a “colorblind and merit-based society” and criticized efforts to integrate race and gender considerations into public and private life. The administration framed the move as aligning with the ideals of civil rights leaders, aiming to treat Americans based on their character rather than their race or gender.

Impact on Policies and Institutions

Trump campaigned on rolling back protections for transgender and nonbinary individuals, a stance that resonated with his base in key swing states. This policy shift will have immediate implications, particularly in federal facilities. For example, transgender individuals in prisons or shelters may be reassigned to spaces that align with their birth sex.

Legal experts warn that changes to healthcare policies and housing protections could take months or years to implement, as agencies will need to follow formal rulemaking procedures. These include issuing notices, gathering public comments, and addressing legal challenges.

Legal Challenges Expected

The executive orders are already drawing sharp criticism from civil rights and LGBTQ advocacy groups. Jennifer C. Pizer, chief legal officer at Lambda Legal, argued that the policies violate equal protection rights. “The president cannot erase the existence of transgender and nonbinary people with the stroke of a pen,” she said, adding that lawsuits to block these orders are likely.

Legal experts also caution transgender Americans to exercise caution when traveling abroad, as changes to gender markers on passports could complicate re-entry into the United States. Border agents might detain individuals with “X” gender markers until alternative identification can be arranged.

Broader Implications

Trump’s orders come at a time when major corporations, including Meta, McDonald’s, and Walmart, have been scaling back their own DEI initiatives. Critics argue that dismantling such programs could undermine efforts to promote racial and social inclusion. Jin Hee Lee, a senior official at the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, called the orders a “real setback” for racial justice and pledged to challenge them in court.

The broader implications of these actions will likely be debated in courtrooms and public forums in the months ahead. While Trump’s supporters view these orders as a return to traditional values, opponents see them as a rollback of progress in social and civil rights.