Information for trans people seeking to leave the US for Sweden

What are the criteria for applying for asylum?

Seeking asylum is an inalienable human right. Every person has this right if they have or feel well founded fear of persecution on a return to their home country. The fear of persecution experienced by the person applying must be both genuine and objectively justifiable. Additionally, no person is to be expelled or returned to their country of origin where their lives or freedoms would be in danger or violated.

Whether or not the situation created by the US anti-trans laws or ”executive orders” could cumulatively amount to a well founded fear of persecution is a question to be determined by migration authorities in each individual asylum case.

Persecution is frequently defined as “the infliction of suffering or harm upon those who differ in a way regarded as offensive, illegal or unnatural.” It can be both physical, emotional or psychological. Principally, harassment or discrimination may not amount to persecution which would enable you to apply for asylum. However, a certain degree of discrimination can amount to persecution. For example if measures of discrimination lead to consequences of a substantially prejudicial nature for the person concerned, which is legally known as cumulative discrimination. This could be continuous harassment without state protection. Not being able to travel safely within a country or being forced to leave the country, legally affecting someone’s right to exist, is another example.  

“Persecution,” (according to Swedish SOGIESC asylum case law and EU case law) can for example, consist of the implementation of criminal laws if they are in fact being applied to arrest someone and sentence them to prison because of their (real or perceived) gender identity, gender expression and/or sexual orientation. Every asylum case is individually investigated and grounds assessed as adherent to a fair trial.

What is the situation for trans people in the US, based on human rights and international law?

Donald Trump’s second term has been marked by his signing of many executive orders. Several of these target trans, non-binary and intersex people specifically. Trump’s “Anti-trans” executive orders are a big blow to trans people’s human rights and freedoms and have set a historic wave of legal attacks on the ability of trans people to legally live and exist in the country. These attacks also affect trans people’s access to basic rights.

Executive orders and how they affect trans, non-binary and intersex people

This is a list of different executive orders, how they affect trans people and how they can be considered to violate human rights and international law:

• Barring schools from supporting social transitioning; Executive orders seek to stop “radical indoctrination” in the school system. The order will block schools from requiring staff to use names and pronouns that align with transgender students’ gender identity
• Recognizing only two sexes; The order states that the US government will recognize only two sexes, male and female, that are fixed at birth. The executive order defines the idea of being transgender as unnatural or biologically impossible. 
• Passport gender marker X; The State Department is no longer issuing the passports and document with a gender-neutral “X” that some people request. It is also no longer allowed to change the gender markers between “M” and “F” .
• Transgender women (inmates) in men’s prisons; The executive order calls for transgender women in federal custody to be moved to men’s prisons. Federal agencies are to house transgender people in detention according to their sex assigned at birth, putting them at extreme risk of physical and sexual violence, and to withhold gender-affirming care in prisons. The physical abuse that they risk being subjected to amounts to cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment or punishment under international law.
• Attempt at another ban on transgender troops; In the executive order on trans people in the military, the president asserted that being transgender “conflicts with a soldier’s commitment to an honorable, truthful, and disciplined lifestyle, even in one’s personal life”. The aim of this order is to push transgender troops out of the military.
• Defunding gender-affirming care; The executive order seeks to halt the use of federal money for gender-affirming medical care for trans people.

What consequences does this have for trans, non-binary and intersex people?

The lack of legal recognition, the use and implementation of derogatory terms and language in the law have resulted in harmful impacts towards trans and intersex persons. These include: 

• Widespread discrimination against trans people, 
• Violence and hate speech, 
• Denial of healthcare,
• A ban on legal recognition of a third gender,
• Criminalization of trans persons in some States,
• Criminalization and creation of fear among parents and guardians of trans-minors, 
• Detention and imprisonment of trans women in males’ cells,
• Difficulties in acquiring passports – marker x passports.

The Swedish migration authorities’ assessments and case law

The Swedish Migration Agency’s position on the situation of trans, intersex and non-binary US citizens seeking asylum in Sweden hasn’t changed. From the latest case law decisions that RFSL is able to access, their assessment is that the situation does not generally amount to a well founded fear of persecution that would qualify real or perceived LGBTQI+ asylum seekers to the legal definition of a refugee.

So far, case law from the Swedish Migration Agency and the Migration Courts concerning asylum applicants with SOGIESC asylum claims (sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, sex characteristics) from the U.S. have all been denied. There are no official statistics showing how many asylum seekers with SOGIESC claims are granted asylum and how many are denied. There isn’t statistics on from which countries either. RFSL has access to Swedish SOGIESC asylum case law through a database gathering all judgments from the Swedish Migration Courts, however, which often have the Migration Agency’s decisions attached. RFSL’s lawyers also receive a large number of cases from LGBTQI+ individuals seeking asylum, including people from the U.S. Therefore RFSL is very well-informed and updated about current SOGIESC asylum case law in general, including from the U.S. 

The Swedish Migration Agency has adopted a list of “safe” countries of origin. The U.S. is not on this list, however. In case law, the U.S. is systematically described as a country with acceptable state-protection of LGBTQI+ people against crimes and criminal actions. A recent example from the Migration Court is cited below, in which the court’s reasoning is representative of the negative decisions from the Swedish Migration Agency and the Migration Court’s rulings in SOGIESC asylum cases from the U.S:

The Swedish Migration Court in Stockholm, 2025-03-14 

“In the appealed decision, the Migration Agency has found that the reasons invoked are not sufficient to consider that the appellants are to be regarded as persons in need of protection. Country information supports that there is acceptable protection by the authorities in the United States and that the U.S. authorities are both willing and able to provide both transgender and non-transgender people with assistance against crime and criminal acts […].”

The assessment by the Migration court:

“The Migration Court agrees with the Migration Agency’s assessment that, in the light of the currently available country information and what the complainants had put forward, it has not been made likely that they would be at risk of persecution or other treatment warranting protection in their home country. Nor has it emerged that they would lack acceptable protection from the authorities in the U.S. within the meaning of the Swedish Aliens Act. For this reason, among others, the appellants cannot be granted a residence permit either on the basis of a refugee or protection status declaration.”

The US is still considered a safe country

According to the Migration Agency, even after the passing and implementation of executive orders which attack trans rights, legal freedoms of existence and recognition, the US is still considered a safe country of origin for trans-asylum seekers. The “safe country of origin” concept is a presumption that certain countries can be designated as generally safe for their nationals – it can be shown that there is generally and consistently no persecution.

It is important to note, that while applying the concept of “safe country of origin”, the migration authorities must take in consideration that;

• An asylum application is not rejected at the outset,
• Each application is examined fully and individually on its merits in accordance with certain procedural safeguards,
• Each applicant is given an effective opportunity to rebut the presumption of safety of the country of origin in his or her individual circumstances,
• The burden of proof on the applicant is not increased, 
• Applicants have the right to an effective remedy in the case of a negative decision
• In the same accord, UNHCR directs migration authorities to offer all applicants from nationally-designated safe countries of origin the opportunity of a personal interview, in which they are explicitly asked whether there are any grounds for considering that the country is not safe in their particular circumstances, thereby giving an effective opportunity to rebut the presumption of safety.

What does all this mean for trans people in the US looking to apply for asylum in Sweden?

At the outset, the executive orders are tritely state sanctioned actions against trans rights. They are a ban on the legal recognition (right of existence) of transgenders, non-binary and intersex persons by the US government. As earlier noted, absence of legal recognition “protection”, derogatory terms and language in the law have resulted in harmful impacts towards trans, non-binary and intersex persons in far as legitimizing violence and discrimination, reinforcing stigma, ignoring the broad spectrum of gender and intersex variations. This therefore exposes these groups to legitimate violence, medical abuse and exclusion.

At this point however, it is still very unclear as to how the U.S. government’s anti-gender policies will be practically enforced on a state-by-state level. For that reason, the situation is likely to be – as it is already – assessed as not generally amounting to a well founded fear of persecution that would qualify a person to the legal definition of a refugee. This means that an application for asylum in Sweden would most likely be rejected. Alternatively, the person applying would have the burden “to demonstrate that they have been put through severe discrimination/harassment, that must be assessed to qualify/amount to cumulative discrimination.

Furthermore, the person applying would be expected to prove that they have utilized “at least tried” all the available means of legal protection before fleeing/seeking asylum. This would be hard to establish. An applicant must show that they are unable to live safely in each and every State of the United States. This would be necessary to fulfil the legal definition of utilising all possible and available legal means of protection (internal relocation alternatives) in the US before fleeing.

Still too early to conclude if the Swedish migration authorities’ assessments will change

The Migration Agency in Sweden has not come out with any new country report or statement regarding the situation for U.S. trans citizens. It is therefore still too early to conclude that the Swedish migration authorities’ assessments of the U.S. trans asylum applications will change. It is also not possible to know, if so, when that may happen. We also don’t know yet whether discrimination (or possible future criminalizing laws in some States) applied against trans people in the near future will be assessed as amounting to a well founded fear of persecution or cumulative discrimination to qualify to a legal definition of “persecution.”​ 

Other possible ways to migrate to Sweden or other European countries

For those seeking to relocate through other immigration channels or pathways, these options vary significantly on a country-by-country basis, and trans US citizens should seek legal advice from immigration professionals wherever they wish to relocate. 

In general, LGBTQI+ US citizens should ensure that they are well informed about the rules and regulations in the country where they want to relocate prior to travelling there. Other pathways could for example through a study visa, partner visa, or work related visas. For information about ways to migrate to Sweden, see the Swedish Migration Agency’s website:

Work visa (migrationsverket.se)

Study visa (migrationsverket.se)

Partner visa (migrationsverket.se)

For more information on applying for asylum:

Applying for asylum (migrationsverket.se)

General information on applying for asylum as an LGBTQI person (rainbowpathnz.com)

Sources

What is an Executive Order? (American Bar Association)

US hospitals suspend healthcare for transgender youth after Trump order (the Guardian)

The Trump Administration Is Transferring Trans Prisoners to Housing Based on Assigned Sex (them.us)

Sex Marker in Passports (Travel.State.Gov)

DEFENDING WOMEN FROM GENDER IDEOLOGY EXTREMISM AND RESTORING BIOLOGICAL TRUTH TO THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT (the White House) 

Prioritizing Military Excellence and Readiness (the White House)

PROTECTING CHILDREN FROM CHEMICAL AND SURGICAL MUTILATION (the White House)

Ending Radical Indoctrination in K-12 Schooling (the White House)

Executive order: National Child Abuse Prevention Month, 2025 (the White House)