{"id":1030,"date":"2023-04-11T19:43:54","date_gmt":"2023-04-11T23:43:54","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.law.georgetown.edu\/gender-journal\/?page_id=1030"},"modified":"2025-05-12T11:10:33","modified_gmt":"2025-05-12T15:10:33","slug":"out-of-bounds-gender-outlaws-immigration-the-limits-of-assimilation","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/www.law.georgetown.edu\/gender-journal\/in-print\/volume-xxiv-issue-1-fall-2022\/out-of-bounds-gender-outlaws-immigration-the-limits-of-assimilation\/","title":{"rendered":"Out of Bounds: Gender Outlaws, Immigration, & The Limits of Assimilation"},"content":{"rendered":"

Queer and transgender Americans have secured substantial federal protections in the past decade, from <\/span>United States v. Windsor<\/span>\u2019s takedown of the\u00a0 Defense of Marriage Act to <\/span>Obergefell v. Hodges\u2019s <\/span>guarantee of marriage equality to <\/span>Bostock v. Clayton<\/span>\u2019s affirmation of the inclusion of queer and transgender identity in Title VII protections. Other recent developments, including new state-level laws protecting the rights of trans\/nonbinary individuals, as well as a federal embrace of third-gender markers on United States passports,\u00a0 have expanded foundational protections. Although mainstream acceptance of queer and trans identities has grown substantially in the past several decades,\u00a0 the Supreme Court\u2019s 2022 <\/span>Dobbs v. Jackson Women\u2019s Health <\/span>decision highlights the precarity of these protections. Yet queer and trans people continue to confront regressive homophobic and transphobic laws and policies as well as an epidemic of private and public violence and discrimination throughout the\u00a0 United States. Despite these protections, queer and trans noncitizens confront a\u00a0 very different regime than the one their United States citizen counterparts face.\u00a0 Recent developments have opened doors to queer and transgender noncitizens,\u00a0 such as access to marriage-based immigration; yet these avenues primarily <\/span>beneft gay cisgender individuals, who can align with the mandates of a cishe terosexist immigration regime, while continuing to exclude those who are less able<\/span>\u2014<\/span>or less willing<\/span>\u2014<\/span>to assimilate into the cisheteronormative American ideal. This Article examines how the expansion of cisheteronormatively anchored rights leaves out queer and trans noncitizens along two axes: access to immigration benefits and access to identity. After reviewing these two axes along which queer and trans noncitizens experience disparate treatment, the Article concludes that assimilationist advocacy strategies for rights of queer and trans persons have led to disparities between queer and trans noncitizens and citizens. This Article further posits that reimagining systems to center the needs of queer and trans noncitizens reveals the liberatory possibilities of the abolition of state regulation of gender and sexuality, leading to a safer and more equitable landscape.\u00a0\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Keep Reading Out of Bounds: Gender Outlaws, Immigration, & The Limits of Assimilation<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Queer and transgender Americans have secured substantial federal protections in the past decade, from United States v. Windsor\u2019s takedown of the\u00a0 Defense of Marriage Act to Obergefell v. Hodges\u2019s guarantee […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":8524,"featured_media":0,"parent":1020,"menu_order":2,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"abstract.php","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_price":"","_stock":"","_tribe_ticket_header":"","_tribe_default_ticket_provider":"","_tribe_ticket_capacity":"0","_ticket_start_date":"","_ticket_end_date":"","_tribe_ticket_show_description":"","_tribe_ticket_show_not_going":false,"_tribe_ticket_use_global_stock":"","_tribe_ticket_global_stock_level":"","_global_stock_mode":"","_global_stock_cap":"","_tribe_rsvp_for_event":"","_tribe_ticket_going_count":"","_tribe_ticket_not_going_count":"","_tribe_tickets_list":"[]","_tribe_ticket_has_attendee_info_fields":false,"footnotes":"","_tec_slr_enabled":"","_tec_slr_layout":""},"class_list":["post-1030","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry"],"acf":[],"ticketed":false,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.law.georgetown.edu\/gender-journal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/1030","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.law.georgetown.edu\/gender-journal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.law.georgetown.edu\/gender-journal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.law.georgetown.edu\/gender-journal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/8524"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.law.georgetown.edu\/gender-journal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1030"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/www.law.georgetown.edu\/gender-journal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/1030\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1782,"href":"https:\/\/www.law.georgetown.edu\/gender-journal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/1030\/revisions\/1782"}],"up":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.law.georgetown.edu\/gender-journal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/1020"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.law.georgetown.edu\/gender-journal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1030"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}