On November 16th, 2015, the defendant's motion for dismissal was denied by the District Court. In her decision denying the motion,
U.S. District Judge Nancy Edmunds held that "plaintiffs have raised a cognizable privacy claim under the
Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution." On January 10th, 2016, Judge Edmunds later denied the defendants subsequent request for reconsideration of the November 16th, 2015 order. It held that the defendant bore the burden to show that the License Policy was narrowly tailored to furthering a compelling state interest. In March of 2016, the license policy was updated in response to the controversy to allow the use of a court order or passport to update ones license. This was a significant because gender changes on passports required only a letter from a clinician that the applicant has "undergone appropriate treatment for their gender identity". On August 23rd, 2016, the court granted the motion for summary judgement because the license policy had been abandoned and was no longer a "live controversy" after to the policy change. Plantiffs agreed the new policy conformed to "current scientific knowledge and research regarding transgender individuals and the medical standard of care for treating persons diagnosed with gender dysphoria." == References ==