This question was motivated by (but isn't exclusively about) passports. On his first day back in office, Donald Trump signed an executive order telling federal agencies, including the State Department, not to recognize identities other than male or female, including when issuing passports.

If, in 2026, there is a two week period where at least a dozen transgender citizens CANNOT(!) acquire/renew passports, this resolves NO. If a motivated trans person (who is willing to check whatever box will get them out of the country on a government form) can basically always get a passport and use it to leave the country, this resolves YES.

If being transgender starts to be criminalized such that at least a dozen people are imprisoned (for at least two weeks) because of their gender identity, for taking hormones, or for other medical care, this resolves NO. If they deliberately get arrested, that doesn't count. If being trans is "criminalized" but not actually enforced, that also doesn't necessarily count.

If it's technically possible to leave the country, but being trans means there's a much higher burden, such that a large number of motivated people will de facto be unable to get passports, this also resolves NO. (Example high burden: establishing residence in another state prior to applying for a passport.)

• Update 2025-02-05 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): Misgendering as a Method:

  • If a transgender person can straightforwardly acquire a passport by selecting or using a misgendered option, then this meets the criteria for a YES resolution.

  • The key factor is that the passport, regardless of how it is issued, must enable the individual to easily leave the country.

• Update 2025-02-11 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): Important Clarifications:

  • Single State Barrier: If a person has to change their state of residence in order to acquire a passport, that is considered a significantly higher burden and can constitute a barrier that de facto means many people are unable to get passports (resolving NO).

  • Long-Distance Travel vs. Relocation: Taking a long bus or car ride to reach an airport where a passport is accepted is not considered a high enough burden to count as being trapped. The key is that the passport must allow a person to leave the country without having to permanently relocate first.

  • Federal vs. State Matter: Although passport issuance is a federal process, state policies can indirectly affect access if they force trans people to move. However, if a workaround (e.g., a long ride) is available, the market can still resolve YES.

• Update 2025-02-11 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment):

  • • Possession of Gender Transition/Hormone Drugs: If more than a dozen transgender individuals are imprisoned for possessing gender transition or hormone drugs, this is treated as de facto criminalization and would likely resolve the market as NO.

  • • Medical Transition Attempts: Imprisonment of more than a dozen individuals for attempting to medically transition via surgery or drugs (through official channels) will similarly be considered as de facto criminalization, resolving the market as NO.

  • • DIY Drug Distribution: Imprisonment for DIY drug distribution is less clear and would require further details before affecting the resolution.

• Update 2025-02-11 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): Update from creator

  • Announcements do not count: The market will not resolve based solely on policy announcements; actual events must occur for a resolution.

  • Imprisonment criterion: If more than a dozen trans people are imprisoned for a significant period as a result of such a policy, the market would resolve as NO.

  • Protest nuance: If imprisonments occur but are largely from deliberate protest (with many trans people still able to leave the country), then the market might remain open and could eventually resolve as YES if passport access is generally maintained.