Why it is in the news
In an affidavit filed in August 2026, reported on 27 September 2026, the Andhra Pradesh government told the Supreme Court that the constitutional validity of the 2026 amendments to the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Act, 2019 is “primarily a matter for the Union of India”, that it had no role in enacting the law, and that it has “not taken any independent action that is discriminatory towards transgender persons” — in effect declining to defend the amendment. The Court is hearing at least a dozen petitions against the law; Uttarakhand has defended it, and the Centre is yet to respond.
The exam angle
Issue: Can Parliament replace a judicially recognised right to self-identify one's gender with a medically certified, narrower statutory category — and if it can, what procedural and substantive safeguards must that category satisfy under Articles 14, 19(1)(a) and 21?