Trump v. Orr (Trump Passport Rule)
BrynoDC Coverage 3 videos
TikTok The Application
The State Department implemented a passport rule requiring applicants to use their sex at birth and claimed an executive order mandated the policy without APA compliance. Both the lower court and appellate court determined that the APA's procedural requirements applied regardless of the executive order.
The Conclusion
The appellate court affirmed that APA procedures were required, denied the government's stay request, and the case is proceeding toward a full hearing on the rule's substantive validity.
No circuit court data for this case.
Case Analysis
Overview
The case concerns a passport rule requiring applicants to use the sex listed at birth. The State Department argued it was bound by an executive order, but a lower court ruled the agency should have followed APA procedures. The appellate court agreed, denying a stay and sending the case toward a full hearing.
Summary
The case concerns a passport rule requiring applicants to use the sex listed at birth. The State Department argued it was bound by an executive order, but a lower court ruled the agency should have followed APA procedures. The appellate court agreed, denying a stay and sending the case toward a full hearing.
Issue
Whether the State Department's passport sex-designation rule complied with the Administrative Procedure Act's notice-and-comment rulemaking requirements or whether an executive order exempted the agency from following those procedures.
Rule
The Administrative Procedure Act requires federal agencies to follow notice-and-comment rulemaking procedures when adopting substantive rules unless a specific statutory exemption applies; executive orders do not authorize agencies to bypass these procedural requirements.
Analysis
The State Department implemented a passport rule requiring applicants to use their sex at birth and claimed an executive order mandated the policy without APA compliance. Both the lower court and appellate court determined that the APA's procedural requirements applied regardless of the executive order.
Conclusion
The appellate court affirmed that APA procedures were required, denied the government's stay request, and the case is proceeding toward a full hearing on the rule's substantive validity.
Flag an issue
This tracker is maintained by BrynoDC and is free because readers fund it. Support