New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie’s name has been in the press a lot lately — and the “any press is good press” adage likely doesn’t apply to his case.
But, while late-night talk-show hosts had endless fun with the building “Bridgegate” scandal, and the dreaded “Stronger than the Storm” jingle reemerged on our airwaves, the LGBT community took issue with yet another questionable action of Christie’s.
On Monday, the day before the state’s legislative session ended, Christie vetoed legislation that would have eased restrictions on changing gender markers on birth certificates. Currently, the state requires that an individual undergo full gender-reassignment surgery in order to change an M to an F, or an F to an M, on a New Jersey-issued birth certificate. The legislation, which both chambers of the state legislature adopted last year, would have instead allowed New Jerseyans to make the document change by supplying evidence from a medical professional that he or she underwent clinical treatment for gender dysphoria, including hormone therapy or other treatments.
Christie cited a lack of “appropriate safeguards” against fraud as the motivation for his veto. Cue the irony of the “appropriate-safeguard” argument in the wake of the Fort Lee bridge debacle and the Hurricane Sandy relief-funding probe …
Regardless of Christie’s other leadership gaffes, this veto showed a clear lack of understanding of the issues facing transgender individuals in his state.
Birth certificates serve as the base form of identity documentation, and without the proper gender marker on that piece of paper, countless trans people may be faced with seemingly insurmountable red tape. As Christie’s own veto statement describes, birth certificates may be requested to secure other forms of identification, or for employment, security or travel purposes, among other functions. So Christie understands the necessity of having an accurate birth certificate but, whereas some may then begin to see the problems that could be created by a birth certificate with an incompatible gender marker, Christie instead leapt to the assumption that easing restrictions on amending a birth certificate could “result in significant legal uncertainties and create opportunities for fraud, deception and abuse.”
Leaving the law as is has the potential to “result in significant legal uncertainties,” as trans people may be unable to rely on the birth certificate for all of the important functions Christie stated it holds.
Apart from logistical confusion, the current law may entail trans people having to explain discrepancies between their birth certificate gender marker and their gender presentation, a forced outing that could affect their safety — let alone their rights to privacy.
Christie’s action wasn’t wholly unsurprising, as there seems to be a penchant for intimidation throughout his administration — but, unfortunately, this time it’s the trans citizens of New Jersey who have to pay the price for Christie’s bully behavior.