Yet U.S. passport policies have moved in the opposite direction, making a dramatic turn toward inaccessibility. Since the “X” gender marker was introduced in 2022, travelers have been left navigating a world of complications. Dr. July Pilowsky, pictured here to the left, is a scientist and U.S. citizen who has been living in Spain. On every trip they’ve taken, invasive pat-downs have highlighted ongoing issues with gender identity paperwork. This progress has prompted a variety of inquiries pertaining to customs officers’ interpretations of the new marker. It further carries important implications for people with non-binary gender identities.
Dr. Pilowsky has joint United States-Chilean citizenship. Or they said they picked the “X” marker so they could better align their appearance with their gender identity. In the end, they recount, “What I wanted to do was disrupt the process. When you have a sex marker that says ‘X’, then suddenly it’s difficult for the CBP officer to build an image of what you’re supposed to look like and compare you against it, positively or negatively.” This short quote illustrates the bewildering paradox that awaits travelers at the borders. Customs officials are likely to rely on sex markers to guide assumptions about what a traveler’s appearance should be.
The introduction of the “X” marker aimed to provide individuals who identify outside the binary options of male and female with more precise travel documents. Nonetheless, even with its availability, the practical use of this marker is still unknown. In June, a federal district court in Massachusetts declared that passports with “X” markers should remain valid. This ruling invalidated previous efforts by the Trump administration to ban them through executive order 14168.
Andy Izenson, senior legal director for the Chosen Family Law Center, expressed skepticism. He expressed his skepticism that these proposed changes would actually affect the real-world scenarios where it matters. “It’s a little bit too soon to say how this is going to practically work out,” he remarked, indicating that the implications for travelers are still unfolding. Izenson questioned the motivations behind the policy changes. He opined that these changes were intended to generate confusion for those seeking documentation for gender identity.
Carl Charles of Lambda Legal called the announcement, which makes “X” markers widely available, a huge victory for non-binary people. This amendment facilitates their ability to have their identities legally recognized in their permanent documents. He emphasized that “People need identity documents to navigate their everyday lives,” highlighting the importance of accurate representation in legal and bureaucratic systems.
Despite these progressions, Dr. Pilowsky’s experience highlights that even with the odds stacked in their favor, barriers still remain. They recounted their distressing encounters with customs officials: “I’ve experienced some slice of the spectrum of things you can experience if you’re under suspicion. The truth of the matter, I don’t want to know about the rest of that spectrum. Most of all, those of us with non-binary identities are experiencing a very acute sense of dread. They fear being penalized for not conforming to strict or traditional views of gender.
As Dr. Pilowsky prepares to return to the United States using a Chilean passport—one that lacks an “X” marker option—they confront an absurd reality: “I’m being forced into the rather absurd situation of reaching out to an immigration lawyer in order to enter my own country.” This unfortunate circumstance highlights some of the broader issues faced when legal paperwork doesn’t match up with one’s identified gender.
The continuing lack of clarity about how customs processing officers will treat gender markers in the future is a big issue for many international travelers right now. Izenson noted, “That question depends on a person’s experience and identity and how they move through the world on a number of levels, including what gender they are perceived as, what their body looks like, what their skin tone is, how they’re dressed.” This confusion makes for a dangerous, unwelcoming space for travelers. They risk further discrimination or invasive treatments based on their gender identity.
Whether customs agents will have the ability to issue custom labels with “X” distinct from “F” or “M.” Whether the authority to draw such distinctions is even still in question. Izenzon’s biggest worry was that people operating as agents of the state would be able to use their own biases, without real accountability. He stated, “I would suggest the intent is to ensure that any individual person who’s acting under color of law or as an agent of the state has as much leeway to act out their personal bigotry as they want.”