A transgender police commissioner from Düsseldorf, who, according to her superiors, changed her gender marker solely to secure a promotion, has suffered another setback in court. The Administrative Court of Düsseldorf rejected in a decision that has now become public an emergency injunction filed by the plaintiff to halt disciplinary investigations and upcoming witness testimony against her (order dated May 28, 2026, file no. 35 L 495/26.O).
The officer changed her gender marker to female after the Self-Determination Law took effect in May 2025. In response, the Police Headquarters accused her of taking this step only to benefit from women’s advancement programs and to be promoted more quickly. In fact, due to the gender-marker change, she climbed 43 places on the promotion list. As a result, she was not considered for promotions at the end of 2025 and the beginning of 2026.
The Police Headquarters relies on the officer’s statements; her lawyer describes it as transphobia
As grounds for the rejection, the police headquarters cited several statements she reportedly made to colleagues that she did not dispute. According to earlier accounts from the Düsseldorf Administrative Court, after a report about a promoted officer with a changed gender entry, she allegedly said: “I’ll do that, too.” Later she allegedly stated that next year she would be “a man again.” Regarding another colleague, she reportedly said that at her planned wedding next year she would not want to marry with the female gender entry.
Her attorney, Christoph Arnold, argued that these remarks were misunderstood irony. He noted that she was frequently questioned about the topic and did not want to reveal her innermost thoughts to everyone. “That was a gag,” Arnold told WDR (TheColu.mn reported). The lawyer had argued that the police headquarters’ actions against his client were motivated by transphobia.
Administrative Court sees indications of misconduct in service
However, the Düsseldorf court found now “sufficient factual indications that the applicant committed a disciplinary offense.” The provisions of the Self-Determination Law would not bar the conduct of a disciplinary procedure, “for a declaration aimed at changing the gender entry is ineffective if it does not at least serve to harmonize gender identity and gender entry.” Accordingly, the police headquarters may continue to examine whether the officer actually lives as a woman.
Opposition to the ruling can be lodged as a complaint with the Higher Administrative Court of North Rhine-Westphalia. (dk)
