OK, I'm not a law expert, I'm not a lawyer, I'm not, but something strikes me as odd about the anti-transgender EO

[Igel]

7. They're trying to merge two things.

One is the X~Y correlation, which is flawed. It's common enough an assertion, but it's not right--it's a correlation.

The other is the other definition, whether a body's "design" is set up to produce sperm or eggs (or their equivalent, if that's needed to be stated). Because not all vertebrates use an X-Y system.

Most intersex neonates are identifiable as one or the other, but the whole "conception" thing muddies the water. If only because in some few cases, developmental factors lead your body develop at odds with the presence or absence of a Y chromosome, or the fetus is XXY (or some other genome that's more than just XY).