New Visa Restrictions Target Transgender Athletes, Raising Title IX and Compliance Concerns for Colleges

On February 24, 2025, Secretary of State Marco Rubio directed the State Department to deny visas to transgender athletes if their sex marker does not align with their sex assigned at birth. His directive, 25 STATE 15576, named Guidance for Visa Adjudicators on Executive Order 14201: “Keeping Men Out of Women’s Sports”, also allows consular officers to deny visas based on “reasonable suspicion” of an applicant’s transgender identity if the applicant's listed sex on their visa application does not match their sex assigned at birth, or if “other evidence casts reasonable doubt on the applicant's sex”.

The State Department’s new visa policy follows President Trump’s February 5, 2025 Executive Order, which requires federal agencies to interpret sex under Title IX strictly as the gender assigned at birth. That Executive Order has already led to the NCAA banning transgender women from competing in women’s collegiate sports, creating compliance concerns for schools. The new visa restrictions add an additional layer of complexity, as institutions must consider how federal immigration policies may further affect their athletic programs and Title IX obligations. 

Impacts on Collegiate Athletics Programs and International Recruitment

For university athletic departments and sports programs, this new directive creates immediate challenges for international recruitment. The directive requires transgender athletes to list their sex assigned at birth on their visa applications, and specifically provides that for applicants seeking a visa to travel to the United States for an athletic competition, “misrepresenting” sex on their visa application will be considered a “material misrepresentation” because it presumably affects their eligibility to participate in the athletic competition. In other words, the State Department views disclosure of the visa applicant’s sex assigned at birth as directly relevant to eligibility determinations for athletic competitions in the United States. Under the February 5, 2025 Executive Order’s framework, this information is deemed essential because it could potentially disqualify an applicant from the very purpose of their travel—participating in gender-specific athletic events.

Broader Legal and Institutional Challenges

 Beyond athletics, the memo’s implications extend to all transgender individuals applying for U.S. visas, including students, researchers, and faculty. By enforcing disclosure of the applicant’s birth sex, and implementing a process where “reasonable doubt” about an applicant's sex leads to temporary refusal under section 221(g) with requests for additional documentation, the policy could invite legal challenges related to discrimination and due process. Specifically, the cable grants consular officers the authority to deny visas based on discrepancies in documents, consular records, or “if other evidence casts reasonable doubt on the applicant’s sex.” Officers are instructed to refuse such cases under section 221(g) and request additional evidence to confirm sex at birth.

Importantly, while the directive uses athletic competition as an example, its plain language does not limit the concept of “material misrepresentation” just to athletes seeking visas. The plain language of Secretary Rubio’s directive leaves open the possibility that consular officers could apply this standard to transgender visa applicants in other contexts, and find that an individual who does not provide their sex assigned at birth is making a “material misrepresentation”. The directive further cites INA section 212(a)(6)(C)(i), which allows applicants refused or found ineligible due to willful misrepresentation of a material fact to be deemed permanently ineligible for a U.S. visa.

Key Considerations for Schools

• Visa Sponsorship & Compliance: Schools should not only assess whether international student-athletes may be impacted by the new restrictions and consider proactive legal strategies, but also work with their International Student offices to consider proactive communication strategies as the State Department’s new policy potentially affects all transgender visa applicants.
• Title IX & Institutional Policies: Universities must weigh their Title IX obligations against the new federal guidance and prepare for potential conflicts in policy enforcement.
• Legal Challenges & Uncertainty: The State Department’s new visa policy may face legal challenges, and institutions should remain informed about any court rulings that could alter enforcement.

For colleges and universities, this creates a complex compliance landscape. Institutions must navigate potential conflicts between federal immigration policies, Title IX obligations, and their own commitments to diversity, equity, and inclusion. Schools with international transgender athletes may need to reassess recruitment strategies, provide legal guidance to affected students, and monitor potential litigation.

Implications for US Citizens

Secretary Rubio's February 24, 2025 directive establishes the State Department's requirements for visas for foreign nationals entering the United States. It does not address the validity of passports issued to US citizens. Pursuant to President Trump's Orders, the State Department is no longer processing gender marker changes for passports, or allowing individuals to obtain a passport with an “X” gender marker. Currently, the State Department's policy is that passports will only be issued with a binary sex marker that matches the applicant's biological sex at birth.

Importantly, the State Department previously clarified that passports listing a sex different from sex assigned at birth, including those with an X gender marker, will remain valid for travel until their expiration date. See https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/passports/passport-help/sex-marker.html. 

Looking Ahead

 The State Department’s visa policy, when combined with Title IX reinterpretation under the Trump administration, places schools in a challenging position. Institutions must carefully assess how these legal developments impact their student-athletes, athletic programs, and broader compliance obligations. 

As the legal landscape continues to shift, colleges and universities should stay proactive—consulting with legal counsel, reviewing recruitment policies, and preparing for potential changes in both federal enforcement and litigation outcomes related to Title IX and transgender athlete participation. 

Seyfarth will continue to monitor these developments and provide updates as developments occur. For more information on how these changes may affect your workplace policies and compliance obligations, please contact any of the authors or any Seyfarth attorney with whom you regularly work.