Executive Order 13988: Preventing and Combating Discrimination on the Basis of Gender Identity or Sexual Orientation
President: Joseph R. Biden Jr.
Directed agencies to apply the Supreme Court’s Bostock reasoning when enforcing federal laws prohibiting sex discrimination.
Status: Revoked.
Is Executive Order 13988 still in effect? No. Executive Order 14148 revoked Executive Order 13988 on January 20, 2025.
What does Executive Order 13988 do?
EO 13988 directed covered federal agencies to review policies enforcing prohibitions on sex discrimination in light of Bostock v. Clayton County. The Supreme Court had held that firing an employee for being gay or transgender violates Title VII. Biden’s order adopted the view that the reasoning generally applied to other sex-discrimination statutes unless their texts provided sufficient contrary indications. Official source.
The operative duty was an agency review, followed by consideration of lawful revisions, suspension, rescission or new actions. Each agency had 100 days to develop an implementation plan in consultation with the Attorney General where appropriate. The order also directed attention to overlapping discrimination, such as discrimination involving race or disability, instead of treating sexual orientation or gender identity as isolated from other protections. Official source.
The order’s policy statement addressed employment, education, housing and health-related concerns, but it did not itself enact a uniform rule for every setting. Its references included Title VII, Title IX, the Fair Housing Act and refugee-assistance nondiscrimination provisions. Whether a particular rule was authorized depended on the relevant statute, required administrative procedures and judicial review; the President could not expand a statute merely by stating an interpretation. Official source.
Before and after
Before the order
Bostock already governed Title VII employment discrimination before Biden issued this order. The executive instruction therefore did not create the Supreme Court’s employment holding. It sought a coordinated review of agency policies and application of that reasoning beyond employment, where statutory wording and legal questions could differ. Official source.
After the order
Agencies were to identify inconsistent actions and plan changes rather than simply declare all previous rules void. Education’s regulatory agenda identifies EO 13988 and EO 14021 among the priorities underlying the 2024 Title IX rulemaking. Trump’s EO 14148 revoked EO 13988 in January 2025; the separate sex-definition order also reversed conflicting executive policy. Neither action overruled the Supreme Court’s Bostock holding, which remains a judicial interpretation of Title VII. Official source.
Who had to do what
| Agency / office | Action | Timing / position |
|---|---|---|
| Heads of covered agencies | Review sex-discrimination actions, consider lawful revisions or new actions and account for overlapping discrimination. | As soon as practicable. |
| Heads of covered agencies | Prepare a plan for identified implementation actions. | Within 100 days. |
| Attorney General | Consult with agencies on reviews and implementation plans where appropriate. | During review and within the 100-day planning period. |
What happened next
The Supreme Court decides Bostock under Title VII. Official source
EO 13988 directs agency review and 100-day implementation plans. Official source
Education’s regulatory record lists publication of its final Title IX rule, identifying EO 13988 among its policy priorities. Official source
EO 14148 expressly revokes EO 13988. Official source
Court status
See the court documents in Sources by type.
Legal and source detail
How it works legally
Title VII’s rule in Bostock came from the Court’s interpretation of the Civil Rights Act, not from EO 13988. The executive order expressly required compliance with the Administrative Procedure Act when revising agency actions. Its agency definition excluded independent regulatory agencies, and its savings provisions preserved statutory authority and OMB functions. The order created no separate privately enforceable right. Revocation changes executive instructions; an individual legal claim must still be evaluated under the governing statute and applicable court decisions. Official source.
Sources by type
If a source is unavailable, first check the cited publisher or another official repository. The cited publisher remains the authority.
Primary and official sources
Orders, laws, court records and official implementation material.
How we checked this
Last checked against the sources above on September 9, 2026. How we research →