Is The Trump Administration Attempting A Backdoor Gun Ban For Trans Americans?

Reporting indicates that the Trump admin is considering requiring gun applicants list their "biological sex at birth," which could put them in a bureaucratic catch-22 if it does not match their ID.

Wikimedia Commons

On Tuesday, Jan. 20, reporters at The Washington Post revealed that the Trump administration is planning sweeping changes to federal firearms regulations and forms. While most of the proposed revisions are framed as expanding access to guns, one provision immediately raised alarms among transgender legal experts. The Justice Department is expected to alter the firearm purchase form to require applicants to list their “biological sex at birth” rather than their gender identity—a seemingly technical change that could function as a de facto ban on firearm access for transgender Americans.

The form, ATF Form 4473, otherwise known as the “firearms transaction record,” is the federal doccument that must be filled out for every firearm purchase from a federal firearms licensee, which includes gun stores, pawn shops, and most retailers. As of now, the form allows applicants to list their gender identity, including a nonbinary gender identity. If the form changes, however, applicants will be expected to list their assigned sex at birth. This could create a bureaucratic headache for transgender people and potentially serious legal issues, placing them in a catch-22.

Consider two scenarios if such regulations take effect when a transgender woman attempts to purchase a firearm. In the first, she complies with federal guidance and lists “male” on the required form. When the dealer then verifies her government-issued ID—as required by law—and the sex marker reads female, the dealer may lawfully refuse the sale, unable to confirm that the form was completed truthfully and accurately. In the second scenario, if she lists “female,” she risks being accused of making a false statement on a federal form—an offense punishable by up to five years in prison. Either way, the result is the same: the transgender applicant is effectively barred from purchasing a gun.

“Whether that rises to the level of materiality for a criminal charge compared to say, using a false name, is up the courts but the mere possibility is enough to chill people from purchasing a gun. If they fill it out with sex assigned at birth, they could be denied for not having matching information,” Alejandra Caraballo, a Harvard Law instructor and civil rights activist, told Erin in the Morning. “I expect to see more instances of this with the federal government weaponizing forms and applications to force trans people to out themselves or even revert state ids to get basic services. This already happened with immigration forms and FAFSA. We could see this expand into welfare programs such as Medicaid, ACA exchange plans etc. Trans people must out themselves or risk losing program benefits or even face the potential of criminal charges for listing their gender identity.”

While blue states have shown a willingness to sue the Trump administration to protect transgender Americans, it remains unclear whether that resolve will extend to firearm regulations. Many Democratic attorneys general support strict gun-licensing requirements, and overlapping state laws—particularly mismatches between state and federal forms—could further complicate any legal challenge. Those dynamics may make the proposed requirements more difficult to legally combat even as their impact on transgender people becomes increasingly clear.

The latest push appears to trace back to recent efforts by far-right influencers advocating restrictions on gun ownership for transgender Americans. In September, Daily Wire reporter Mary Olohan reported that the Justice Department was considering “banning guns for transgenders,” quoting a source who said, “we’re not playing semantics with words like dysphoria. We’re talking about trannies, and we don’t think they should have guns.” That reporting was later corroborated by The Washington Post and CNN. While little changed in the immediate aftermath, months later it appears the administration may have identified a regulatory pathway to impose such restrictions.

For now, the proposal remains in its earliest stages and has not yet been formally submitted as a federal rule. That process is lengthy, opening the door to public comment, legal challenges, and potential delays before any change could take effect. Still, if the administration ultimately moves to restrict gun access for transgender Americans, an unresolved question looms: whether the country’s most powerful gun rights organizations will step in to defend transgender gun owners. When the proposal surfaced previously, the NRA publicly condemned it—an unexpected moment of alignment that surprised many transgender advocates. This time, however, the mechanism under consideration is far subtler, potentially designed to sidestep that opposition.