COLUMBUS, Ohio — In a closely watched case with implications for transgender rights across Ohio, the state Supreme Court failed to reach a majority decision on whether Hailey Adelaide, a transgender woman, could change the sex marker on her birth certificate. The divided decision effectively upholds a lower court ruling denying Adelaide’s request, citing state law that limits birth record corrections to errors made at the time of birth.
The Second District Court of Appeals had previously concluded that Ohio law, under R.C. 3705.15, permits corrections only when the original record was incorrectly recorded at birth. Since Adelaide’s birth certificate accurately reflected her male anatomy at birth, the appellate court ruled the probate court acted within its authority in denying the request.
This decision underscores the patchwork of policies across Ohio, where some probate courts grant similar requests while others do not. The lack of consensus at the state Supreme Court leaves the law unclear and offers no resolution for transgender individuals seeking to align their identity with official documents.
The Case That Divided the Courts
Adelaide, born in 1973 as Brian Edward DeBoard, sought to amend her birth certificate in 2021, arguing that the male sex marker did not reflect her lived experience or identity as a woman. She told the probate court she began identifying as female at the age of four and believed her birth certificate should have accounted for her future understanding of her gender identity.
The Clark County Probate Court denied her request, stating that the sex marker on her birth certificate had been correctly recorded based on her anatomy at birth. The Second District Court of Appeals affirmed this decision in 2022, prompting Adelaide to take her case to the Ohio Supreme Court.
However, the justices could not reach a consensus, with no clear majority emerging on whether Adelaide’s appeal should proceed.
Judicial Disagreement
Three justices—Joseph T. Deters, Chief Justice Sharon L. Kennedy, and R. Patrick DeWine—argued that the court lacked jurisdiction to consider Adelaide’s appeal because her case did not involve an opposing party or “adversity.” They characterized the probate court’s decision as administrative, akin to appointing members to a park board, and therefore not subject to appeal.
Four other justices—Patrick F. Fischer, Michael P. Donnelly, Melody Stewart, and Jennifer Brunner—disagreed, asserting that the court had the authority to hear the case. However, they split on how to resolve the underlying issue.
Justices Fischer, Donnelly, and Stewart sided with the lower court, finding that current state law does not allow for changes to a birth certificate based on an individual’s evolving gender identity. Justice Brunner, meanwhile, contended that probate courts have the authority to make such changes and criticized the lack of uniformity across Ohio counties.
Calls for Legislative Action
While the court’s decision leaves the Second District’s ruling intact, the split opinions highlighted the need for legislative clarity. Justice Donnelly, who sided against Adelaide’s appeal, called on Ohio lawmakers to update state law to address the concerns of transgender residents. Justice Brunner also pointed out that prior to 2015, Ohio probate courts routinely granted similar requests, and that confusion over state policies has led to inconsistent outcomes.
Adelaide’s case reflects broader debates about the rights of transgender individuals in Ohio, where legal and bureaucratic hurdles often prevent them from aligning their official documents with their gender identities. For now, Adelaide and others in her position face an uphill battle in a legal system that continues to leave critical questions unresolved.
The outcome is a setback for equality advocates, who argue that restrictive interpretations of state law fail to account for the lived realities of transgender individuals. With no majority decision from the Ohio Supreme Court, the issue remains in limbo, underscoring the need for state legislators to step in and provide clear guidance on birth record amendments for transgender residents.