D.C. DMV Follows Oregon in Announcing ‘Non-Binary’ Gender Option ‘X’ on Driver’s Licenses

Lauretta  Brown
|
Posted: Jun 22, 2017 8:15 PM
D.C. DMV Follows Oregon in Announcing ‘Non-Binary’ Gender Option ‘X’ on Driver’s Licenses

Earlier this week the District of Columbia’s Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) announced that D.C. residents will be able to choose a gender neutral identifier on driver’s licenses such as "non-binary", "undesignated" and “other” categories, as WUSA9 reports.

The new categories will show up as an "X" on their cards instead of an "M" or "F." The option will be available on Tuesday.

The DMV also reportedly will not require that people seeking to change their gender designation obtain a signed letter or confirmation from a medical provider or legal service provider attesting that the person is transgender.

D.C.’s change follows Oregon’s recent rule change that made them the first state in the nation to offer a non-binary designation on their driver’s licenses.

D.C. Councilmember Brianne Nadeau (D-Ward 1) is pushing for a more permanent change to D.C. law with her bill that would require the DMV to offer residents the option of a non-binary gender marker.

Thomas Fazzini, communications director for Nadeau, told Metro Weekly that the councilmember called the DMV’s policy change “complimentary” to the council’s efforts.

“Councilmember Nadeau’s would make this change permanent in the DC Code,” Fazzini said. “Since the Mayor’s change is administrative, it could be undone by a future administration, however unlikely that may be.”

A recent study found that D.C. has the highest transgender identification rate in the nation with 2.8 percent of the population identifying as transgender. It is the only jurisdiction in the study where the transgender population exceeded 1 percent, the next highest is Hawaii at .78 percent.

The California state Senate passed a bill May 31st to add a third gender option on state IDs, sending it to the state Assembly. The California Family Council, a Christian group, is against the measure, arguing that "government documents need to reflect biological facts for identification."