# Executive Order 14168

Executive Order 14168, titled "Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government", is an executive order issued by Donald Trump on January 20, 2025, the day of his second inauguration as president of the United States.
The order withdraws federal recognition for transgender people. It requires federal departments to recognize gender as an immutable male-female binary (determined by biological sex assigned at conception) that cannot be changed, replace all instances of "gender" with "sex" in materials, cease all funding for gender-affirming care and the promotion of "gender ideology", cease allowing gender self-identification on federal documents such as passports, and prohibit transgender people from using single-sex federally funded facilities congruent with their gender. It also calls upon the Attorney General to re-evaluate the application of Bostock v. Clayton County (2020) as to not provide Title VII protection based on gender identity in federal activities.
Provisions of the order have faced legal challenges, with temporary restraining orders having been issued to suspend the withholding of federal funding to programs that fund gender-affirming care and promote "gender ideology", the forced transfers of transgender inmates to facilities congruent with their sex assigned at birth, and the mass removal of documents published by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Food and Drug Administration, Department of Health and Human Services that mention topics related to "gender ideology".

## Background

On June 29, 2023, then-presidential candidate Donald Trump signed the "Presidential Promise to American Women" authored by the Concerned Women for America (CWA) Legislative Action Committee. According to Penny Young Nance, president of CWA, this was a "pledge to American women stating unequivocally there are only two genders, only women can be mothers and bear children, and as president, he will protect our safe spaces, our locker rooms, bathrooms, prisons, domestic violence shelters, health care, education, and, yes, ban biological men from competing in women’s sports.”
Trump signed the order on his first day as president, as well as more than 25 other executive orders. A Trump administration official said "this is step one" and that more restrictions on transgender people will follow. CWA considers Trump's Executive Order a fulfillment of his Presidential Promise.

## Summary

The order attacks what it calls "gender ideology," described as replacing "the biological category of sex with an ever-shifting concept of self-assessed gender identity, permitting the false claim that males can identify as and thus become women and vice versa, and requiring all institutions of society to regard this false claim as true". The order stated that it would "defend women’s rights and protect freedom of conscience by using clear and accurate language and policies that recognize women are biologically female, and men are biologically male."
The order additionally defines "female" and "male" as "a person belonging, at conception to the sex that produces the large reproductive cell" and a "person belonging, at conception, to the sex that produces the small reproductive cell" respectively.
The executive order mandated that:
* Federal agencies should use "sex" instead of "gender", remove materials that "promote gender ideology", and halt "funding of gender ideology"$^{:§3(a),3(e)}$
* Official government documents such as passports and visas stop allowing self-selection of gender$^{:§3(d)}$ Existing documents will not be affected unless they are renewed.
* Transgender people not be imprisoned in facilities congruent with their gender identity$^{:§4a}$
* The Bureau of Prisons halt any federal funding for gender-affirming care$^{:§4(c)}$ and that the Prison Rape Elimination Act be amended and Americans with Disabilities Act be re-interpreted to do so.
* That federal funding no longer go to gender-affirming care
* The attorney general provides guidance "to correct the misapplication of the Supreme Court’s decision in Bostock v. Clayton County (2020) to sex-based distinctions" in federal agency activities.$^{:§3(f)}$
* Prior policies and federal government documents that are inconsistent with this order be rescinded, including policies that require the use of names and pronouns consistent with a person's gender identity in federal workplaces.

## Analysis

Some (including Sarah McBride, the first transgender member of Congress) have speculated that the order may be interpreted as defining everyone as female since male genes are not expressed until 6–8 weeks after conception. This was called false by Snopes, referring to recent research that shows that it is incorrect to say that all embryos start as female. Instead, the Snopes analysis points out that since the executive order does not define what "belonging...to" means in terms of determining a person's sex, the order could be interpreted as either all persons belong to no sex, or alternatively, all persons belong to both sexes. In early development, human embryos develop both early-stage female reproductive tracts (i.e., Müllerian ducts) and early-stage male reproductive tracts (i.e., Wolffian ducts). It is only later in development that the expression of male or female genes normally causes one or the other of these tracts to further develop into male or female reproductive tracts, and the other to be absorbed.
The order defines a female as "a person belonging, at conception to the sex that produces the large reproductive cell," while a male is a "person belonging, at conception, to the sex that produces the small reproductive cell." It is not possible to determine at conception which reproductive cells an embryo will eventually create as it takes eight to 10 weeks for genetic signals to stimulate the development of non-neutral gonads (i.e. testes or ovaries). For example, a malfunction in the SRY gene can result in androgen insensitivity where an individual has an XY karyotype but is physiologically female. Intersex people were not included in the executive order. Intersex people are individuals born with any of several sex characteristics, including chromosome patterns, gonads, or genitals that, according to the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, "do not fit typical binary notions of male or female bodies". According to intersex advocate Alicia Roth Weigel, this order "attempts to negate our very existence".
Writing for The New York Times, Masha Gessen argued that the restrictions of this order, along with those implemented as part of Executive Order 14187 and Executive Order 14183 constituted an effort by the Trump administration to "denationalize" transgender people, much in the way that Jews were in 1930s Germany.

## Implementation

Hours after the order was signed, the Trump administration deleted mentions of LGBTQ+ resources across federal government websites.

### Department of State

On January 22, 2025, Secretary of State Marco Rubio directed the Department of State to suspend all passport applications seeking a sex marker change or a nonbinary "X" sex marker. By January 23, 2025, a state department webpage describing how to amend the gender marker on passports was taken offline. According to a White House spokesperson, passports that have not expired will remain valid, regardless of how gender is depicted, but new applications will have to comply with the order and designate sex according to that assigned at birth. Some trans people also allege that upon applying to renew their passports, their documents were seized indefinitely and they were not issued a passport in any form.
International travel advisories by the State Department replaced their language on "LGBTQ+ Travelers" with language around "LGB Travelers" and removed reference to issues unique to transgender travelers to other countries.
On February 25, Rubio announced that transgender visa applicants who list a sex other than their assigned sex at birth on their visa application would be permanently banned from entry to the United States, and that applicants who do list their assigned sex on their application but whose home documents list a different sex would have their file marked with the letters 'SWS25' for tracking purposes. The announcement is framed as part of a ban targeting transgender female athletes alongside Executive Order 14201, however according to legal experts, the actual text of the order would apply to all transgender travelers.

### Department of Health and Human Services

On February 1, 2025, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention ordered its scientists to retract any not yet published research they had produced which included any of the following banned terms: "Gender, transgender, pregnant person, pregnant people, LGBT, transsexual, non-binary, nonbinary, assigned male at birth, assigned female at birth, biologically male, biologically female”. Larry Gostin, director of the World Health Organization Center on Global Health Law, said that the directive amounted to censorship of not only government employees, but private citizens as well. For example, if the lead author of a submitted paper works for the CDC and withdraws their name from the submission, that kills the submission even if coauthors who are private scientists remain on it.
All references to transgender people and gender identity were also removed from the Center for Disease Control's website, including survey results lessons on building supportive environments for trans and nonbinary students. The CDC and other federal agencies also directed their employees to remove pronouns from their email signatures.
The National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases's HIV Language Guide, described in its background introduction as being "designed to help NIAID staff communicate with empowering rather than stigmatizing language", was also removed.
On February 19, the Office on Women's Health launched a website entitled "Protecting Women and Children", which featured a one-page explanation of the department's transgender policy, defining a person's sex as "an immutable biological classification" determined strictly by their reproductive function as either male or female, and featured a video of conservative activist Riley Gaines explaining the new policy.
On February 26, the CDC stopped processing transgender-related data.
In early March, hundreds of National Institute of Health grants were terminated for including targeted keywords, including relating to LGBT people and/or gender identity in a biomedical context.

### Department of Justice

The Human Rights Campaign and ACLU said they had received reports that transgender women were being transferred to men's prisons, told they would be, or moved to solitary confinement. The legal director of the HRC said the court orders granting inmates access to gender affirming care remain in effect despite federal policy changes. Data suggests that over 2,000 trans people in federal custody could be affected. The Bureau of Prisons stopped reporting the number of imprisoned transgender people as a result of the order.
Advocates say the order violates the Prison Rape Elimination Act (PREA), a 2003 law requiring trans inmates be housed on a case-by-case basis and federal, state, and local prisons to enforce a zero-tolerance sexual assault policy. They also argued it violated the Americans with Disabilities Act, since the ADA recognizes gender dysphoria as a disability, It was also argued to violate the U.S. Constitution's Fifth Amendment's Due Process Clause and Eighth Amendment's prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment.
On February 24, 2025, U.S. district judge Royce Lamberth temporarily blocked the transfer of trans women in federal prisons to men's facilities, and the denial of their access to hormone therapy. The temporary restraining order was in response to a lawsuit filed the previous week by three imprisoned trans women.

### Intelligence services

On February 18, 2025, the DHS Office of Intelligence and Analysis removed from their policy manual rules prohibiting the I&A from surveilling people based solely on their sexual orientation or gender identity.
On February 26, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard fired more than 100 intelligence officers from the National Security Agency for discussing in group chats topics relating to preferred pronouns, gender transition, and polyamory, which were deemed “sexually explicit” by investigators. The officers’ security clearances were revoked shortly thereafter.

### Other departments
#### Department of Education

In February 2025, the Department of Education announced that the Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA) would be altered to no longer allow students to identify as nonbinary.

#### Department of Housing and Urban Development

On February 7, the Department of Housing and Urban Development declared that they would stop enforcing a 2016 policy prohibiting gender identity discrimination in housing programs and shelter spaces. According to an announcement by HUD Secretary Scott Turner, the goal of this repeal was to allow women's shelters to implement bans on transgender women from entering.

#### Department of the Interior

The National Park Service removed all references to the existence of transgender people and transgender rights from its webpages covering the Stonewall National Monument, the Stonewall riots, and LGBTQ+ history more broadly, going so far as to change the acronym on the site from "LGBTQ+" to "LGB".

#### Independent federal agencies

The National Endowment for the Arts has announced that all 2026 projects must ensure that they are "compliant with all legal, regulatory, and policy requirements applicable to [their] award." This includes not promoting "gender ideology”.
The National Science Foundation compiled an internal list of words the presence of which in a research paper, grant application, or other relevant documentation, would flag a project and put its funding under review. Words that would initiate a review included "gender", "LGBT", and "women", among others.
NASA took down webpages relating to LGBTQ+ employee resource groups and diversity at the organization, and according to employees, verbally informed its employees that any display of LGBTQ+ symbols, such as a pride flag in one's workspace, would be met with being placed on administrative leave.
Shortly following the order, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission's acting chair said that it would no longer allow "X" gender markers for those filing discrimination charges. In mid-February 2025, the EEOC ceased investigating all new claims of discrimination against transgender people in employment, and moved to dismiss current claims.
In February 2025, the Office of Personnel Management announced that insurance carriers that provide health insurance coverage to Federal employees under the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program must provide only two options for a person's sex (i.e., male and female) on their insurance forms.
The Social Security Administration removed its pages on gender identity and changing sex identification. It has not responded to requests for comment on its current policy. An internal message sent on January 31, 2025, instructed employees not to accept or process changes to gender markers on Social Security records, effective immediately.

### Non-governmental organizations

On February 7, 2025, the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children announced that they would remove all references to trans people from their public-facing materials in order to comply with the executive order. Shortly thereafter, the Rape, Abuse & Incest National Network likewise cut mention of transgender people from its public facing materials.

## Reactions
### Organizations
#### Against

The executive order was widely condemned as "extremist" by feminist, LGBTQ+, and civil rights organizations. According to The New Republic, the executive order is "packed with the kinds of conspiratorial thinking about gender and sexuality that have become commonplace on the right." The American Civil Liberties Union's Chase Strangio described the executive order as aimed at eradicating trans people from civic and public life. The ACLU vowed to take the Trump administration to court "wherever we can" to defend LGBTQ+ rights.
Human Rights Campaign President Kelley Robinson said "today's expected executive actions targeting the LGBTQ+ community serve no other purpose than to hurt our families and our communities" and that "we will fight back against these harmful provisions with everything we've got." Advocates for Trans Equality stated that it would continue to protect national transgender rights. Asian Americans Advancing Justice also expressed its intention to "confront hate and discrimination in all its forms" regarding the order. Lambda Legal chief legal officer Jennifer Pizer stated that she expects her organization and others to sue the administration.
The National Organization for Women condemned Trump's "extremist executive orders spree" and "scorecard of shame" that NOW said is "defined by cruelty, not common sense, and puts people in real danger." The National Council of Jewish Women and Keshet issued a joint statement condemning Trump's actions targeting the LGBTQ+ community for "seeking to erase federal recognition of trans people" and said that these actions are designed to instill hatred, promising to fight them with legal action.
The assertions of the executive order were described as being at odds with determinations of expert groups including the American Medical Association, which holds that gender identity is a spectrum, not an "immutable male–female binary".
In February 2025, 463 artists signed a letter asking the National Endowment for the Arts to roll back the restrictions on the funding of projects promoting DEI or "gender ideology".

#### For

Jim Daly, president of Focus on the Family, issued a statement in support of the executive order stating in part "We are long overdue in this effort to re-establish the exclusivity of two genders...". The American Family Association has praised the change as one that "acknowledges the truth". The Alliance Defending Freedom stated that the order is a "180-degree turn back toward reality and common sense." The Women's Liberation Front (WoLF), an American trans-exclusionary radical feminist organization that opposes transgender rights, sees the executive order as a "major victory".

### Politicians and elected offices

Maryland's Attorney General Anthony Brown released a statement denouncing the order, stating that it would threaten peoples' lives, and that he aimed to "protect all Marylanders – especially members of marginalized communities – and wants transgender residents of our State to know that they belong, they matter, and our Office will fight for their rights and safety."

### International

According to Voice of America, the order received mixed reactions across Africa, with conservatives welcoming it and gay rights activists condemning it.
Canadian human rights groups and activists have, in response to the order, called for transgender and non-binary people to be exempted from the Safe Third Country Agreement (which prevents asylum claimants from making a claim in Canada after first arriving in the U.S.).

## Legal challenges
### Prisons

On January 26, 2025, an incarcerated trans woman represented by GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders (GLAD) and the National Center for Lesbian Rights (NCLR) filed a lawsuit in the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts, alleging that forced transfers and detransition of trans inmates violates the Due Process Clause, Eighth Amendment protections against cruel and unusual punishments, and the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. On January 30, 2025, District Judge George A. O'Toole Jr. unsealed the case and revealed that he had issued a temporary restraining order against transferring the woman or preventing her from receiving gender-affirming care. The organizations went on to file further lawsuits representing three other trans inmates, including two who had previously been sexually assaulted in men's facilities. On February 4, 2025, District Judge Royce Lamberth issued a temporary restraining order against the provision under Eighth Amendment grounds.

### Passport applications

On February 7, 2025, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) filed a lawsuit in Massachusetts challenging changes to passport registration policies that were made under the order, alleging violations of the Administrative Procedure Act (by not providing a customary notice and comment period on associated changes to application forms), the First Amendment (considering one's gender identity to be a protected expression), the Due Process Clause, the Equal Protection Clause, and that they constitute a restriction on the freedom of movement.

### Removal of documents

On February 13, 2025, following a lawsuit by Doctors for America, Judge John Bates issued a temporary restraining order, requiring that the CDC, FDA, and HHS restore web pages that it had retracted in compliance with the order. However, the Trump administration mandated that all restored pages also contain a disclaimer warning that "the information on this page promoting gender ideology is extremely inaccurate and disconnected from the immutable biological reality that there are two sexes, male and female."

### Civil rights

On February 19, 2025, the civil rights organizations National Urban League, National Fair Housing Alliance, and AIDS Foundation of Chicago filed a federal lawsuit challenging the attacks on DEI and accessibility in executive orders 14168, 14151, and 14173. The organizations filing the lawsuit, National Urban League v. Trump, are represented by Lambda Legal and the Legal Defense Fund.
On February 20, 2025, nine nonprofit organizations supporting LGBTQ and HIV-affected communities filed a lawsuit, San Francisco AIDS Foundation v. Trump, challenging executive orders 14168, 14151, and 14173. The organizations are represented by Lambda Legal.

### Freedom of speech

On March 6, 2025, four arts organizations that support transgender and nonbinary art and artists filed a lawsuit against the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA). The suit, Rhode Island Latino Arts v. National Endowment for the Arts, argues that the NEA's prohibition on funding the promotion of "gender ideology" violates first and fifth amendment rights. The organizations are represented by the ACLU.

### Federal funding

On March 1, 2025, Judge Lauren King blocked the part of the executive order that sought to cut federal funding for programs that "promote gender ideology" and withhold federal funding from health-care providers who offer gender-affirming care to minors.