History
  • No items yet
midpage
305 F. Supp. 3d 327
United States District Court
2018
Read the full case

Background

  • Three transgender individuals and an LGBT organization sued Puerto Rico officials seeking to change the gender marker on Puerto Rico birth certificates to reflect applicants’ gender identity without any visible notation (e.g., strike-through) revealing transgender status.
  • Plaintiffs have transitioned socially and medically to align with their gender identities; they updated other IDs (driver’s license, passport, Social Security) but were barred from changing the birth-certificate gender marker under Puerto Rico’s Birth Certificate Policy.
  • Birth certificates in Puerto Rico indicate birth-assigned sex based on genital appearance and the Registry refused to issue a clean replacement certificate showing affirmed gender.
  • Plaintiffs allege the policy forces disclosure of transgender status, causing stigma, discrimination, and interference with privacy and civic participation (e.g., voting).
  • The Commonwealth already permits gender-marker changes on driver’s licenses and voter ID without disclosing birth-assigned sex; executive orders and agency rules enable those changes.
  • The court found the facts undisputed and considered motions for summary judgment; defendants’ motion to dismiss was previously denied and defendants did not answer the amended complaint.

Issues

Issue Plaintiff's Argument Defendant's Argument Held
Whether Puerto Rico’s policy forcing birth certificates to show birth-assigned sex violates privacy rights Policy compels disclosure of intimate personal information (transgender status) and infringes decisional and informational privacy under the Fourteenth Amendment Policy is consistent with Demographic Registry law and legitimate state interest in accurate vital records Court held policy violates decisional and informational privacy and is not justified by a legitimate government interest
Whether transgender persons are entitled to a replacement birth certificate showing affirmed gender without notation Plaintiffs seek issuance of a new certificate reflecting true gender, without strike-outs or disclosure Registry contends existing statutory/regulatory framework requires birth-assigned sex to remain on certificate Court ordered Registry to issue new birth certificates reflecting affirmed gender without disclosure and to adopt DTOP form/criteria for applications
Appropriate standard and remedies: documentary criteria for change Plaintiffs proposed alignment with DOT’s existing ID process requiring passport/driver’s license or clinician certification Defendants did not successfully justify continued prohibition or propose narrowly tailored alternative Court adopted DOT DTOP-DIS-324 application criteria and allowed clinician certification when other IDs unavailable
Whether claim is precluded by Puerto Rico statutory/administrative precedent (Ex parte Delgado Hernández) Plaintiffs argue constitutional privacy rights supersede any administrative interpretation Defendants relied on Ex parte Delgado Hernández limiting Registry changes under statutory interpretation Court held Delgado Hernández is limited to statutory interpretation and does not override constitutional privacy protections

Key Cases Cited

  • Daury v. Smith, 842 F.2d 9 (1st Cir.) (recognizing constitutional right to privacy)
  • Vega‑Rodriguez v. Puerto Rico Tel. Co., 110 F.3d 174 (1st Cir.) (describing two clusters of privacy rights: autonomy and informational privacy)
  • Whalen v. Roe, 429 U.S. 589 (1977) (discussing informational privacy and state interests in collection of personal data)
  • Borucki v. Ryan, 827 F.2d 836 (1st Cir.) (privacy doctrine precedent)
  • Nat’l Aeronautics & Space Admin. v. Nelson, 562 U.S. 134 (2011) (informational‑privacy principles)
  • Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pa. v. Casey, 505 U.S. 833 (1992) (autonomy and personal dignity in privacy jurisprudence)
  • Fournier v. Reardon, 160 F.3d 754 (1st Cir.) (constitutional privacy is fundamental)
  • Doe v. Town of Plymouth, 825 F. Supp. 1102 (D. Mass.) (privacy protects nondisclosure of sensitive personal medical information)
  • Doe v. Coughlin, 697 F. Supp. 1234 (N.D.N.Y.) (privacy and compelled disclosure of medical information)
Read the full case

Case Details

Case Name: Gonzalez v. Nevares
Court Name: United States District Court
Date Published: Apr 20, 2018
Citations: 305 F. Supp. 3d 327; CIVIL 17–1457CCC
Docket Number: CIVIL 17–1457CCC
Log In
    Gonzalez v. Nevares, 305 F. Supp. 3d 327