9th Cir.

Roe, et al. v. Petersen, et al.

April 28, 2026 ·4:20-cv-00484- ·Published · By Aisha Johnson

The Ninth Circuit granted a stay pending appeal of a district court order that had struck the word operation from an Arizona statute governing birth certificate amendments. This action preserves the status quo while the appellate court considers the merits of the constitutional challenge brought by a class of transgender individuals.

Listen to this decision 0:00 / 2:01

Background

Plaintiffs, a class of transgender people in Arizona, sued the Director of the Arizona Department of Health Services, alleging that Arizona Revised Statutes Section thirty-six three hundred thirty-seven subsection A three violates the Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses. The statute required the registrar to amend a birth certificate only upon verification that the individual had undergone a sex change operation. The district court granted summary judgment for the plaintiffs and entered a permanent injunction striking the word operation from the statute and its regulation, with an effective date of April thirtieth, two thousand twenty-six.

The court’s reasoning

The panel applied the four-factor test from Nken v. Holder to determine whether a stay pending appeal was warranted. The factors include whether the applicant has made a strong showing of likely success on the merits, whether the applicant will suffer irreparable injury absent a stay, whether issuance of the stay will substantially injure other parties, and where the public interest lies. The panel found that a stay was warranted to preserve the status quo while the court decides the merits of the appeal.

What it means going forward

The district court’s permanent injunction and its effective date are suspended pending the Ninth Circuit’s final decision on the merits. The current Arizona law requiring a sex change operation for birth certificate amendments remains in effect during the appeal.