The Justice Department, under President Donald Trump, is moving to prevent male inmates from being housed in women’s prisons, though challenges remain. A memo from December 2 indicates a plan for January 2025 that mirrors a presidential order asserting that inmates should be assigned to prisons based on their biological sex. The existing standards under the Prison Rape Elimination Act (PREA) from 2012 currently allow for men to be placed in women’s facilities. It’s uncertain how states with such policies will adhere to these forthcoming standards aimed at guiding correctional institutions.
Lee Ann O’Neill, chief legal officer at the America First Policy Institute, criticized past practices that allowed violent men into women’s facilities, describing it as unreasonable and unsafe. She sees the recent memo as a significant step toward rectifying this situation, although she acknowledges that much remains to be done to persuade even progressive states to align with these changes.
Inquiries made to various state corrections departments about their policies revealed that California and Minnesota confirmed adherence to current PREA standards, while the Washington Department declined to comment. The responses from New Jersey and Maine were not received.
While PREA was intended to safeguard female prisoners from sexual assault, some argue that it has inadvertently compromised their safety, as it allowed men into women’s spaces based on their self-identified gender. Standards give local correctional facilities the discretion to assign housing based on individual cases regarding gender identity. The leaked memo notes that evaluations should pause if they’re inconsistent with the upcoming executive actions.
Beth Parlato, a senior counsel, stated that the goal of PREA was to reduce assaults and facilitate humane treatment, but housing decisions based solely on gender identity might undermine these objectives. Trump’s executive order defines gender strictly in biological terms, which excludes gender identity, and further prohibits federal funding for medical procedures related to gender transition.
This executive action led to a swift legal response, with a group of “transgender” men claiming that the new definitions put them at risk, labeling such definitions as discriminatory. A federal judge has temporarily allowed some of these men to remain in a women’s prison until early 2026, despite their biological sex.
Concerns have arisen regarding the impact of Obama-era PREA standards, as evident in several troubling incidents. For instance, a self-identified “transgender” man reportedly raped a female inmate in New York, and other cases in New Jersey involved pregnancies among women inmates due to new housing policies.
Attempts are underway in New York to legislate policies that would require correctional facilities to house inmates based on their self-identified gender. Critics argue that prioritizing the feelings of men who identify as women over the safety of women in prisons marks a significant decline in women’s rights.
In Washington state, an inmate named Christopher Williams, who was sentenced for a violent crime, allegedly assaulted women after entering a women’s prison. His transfer was approved despite a history of violence against women, raising significant safety concerns.
Williams has claimed that he didn’t feel safe in men’s facilities. However, the request for his transfer in the past was refused until, unexpectedly, it was granted later. Following the transfer, Williams faced allegations of sexual assault soon after entering the women’s prison.
Although attempts to reach out to Williams were unsuccessful, advocates like Ichikawa emphasize the need for equitable rights within the prison system, arguing that one person’s rights should not infringe on another’s safety.
