This is a weird question. So the return of anti cross dressing laws would count? I think realistically what happens is that hormones are banned for transition related purposes, either legally or by a change in psychiatric standards, and then possibly estrogen becomes a scheduled substance which is allowed for sex congruent uses but nothing else. This is still really bad but doesn't seem to meet your definition. Anti-crossdressing laws actually already exist in some places but are unlikely to emerge in a broader capacity imho except maybe in specific places like courthouses (this would be someplace in the United States but I assume you meant an entire state or municipality at minimum)

@JessicaEvans Also, what if one is merely ticketed and then referred to court where the defacto punishment is inpatient psychiatric treatment? Does this satisfy your conditions?

Would it count if you could be arrested for using a bathroom not corresponding to your natal sex?

@DanielFilan I would not count this, not to say that it's not serious but this question is attempting to measure something more drastic

Does it have to be a law that is specific to trans or can someone expressing their gender expression in public, and end up getting charged/arrested apply here?

@higherLEVELING if it's specifically for gender expression it counts

@SemioticRivalry can you define gender expression? I wanna b sure it's the same definition

@higherLEVELING Merriam Webster says "the physical and behavioral manifestations of one's gender identity".

which seems fine for our purposes

"United States" = federal? Federal + state? Federal + state + county/city? Any government + local religious communes like the Amish?

I suspect there are religious groups that would act in a government capacity and punish you for being transgender. Though you could likely leave entirely, it would be more like "exile".

@Mira Any governmental body that would arrest someone for gender expression that is not of their biological sex would qualify. Private actions like excommunication would not qualify.

@SemioticRivalry Oh, what about native reservations? "Tribal sovereignty" might mean you wouldn't consider them part of the "United States" government, even if the land is contained within its borders.

@Mira Hmm, I definitely didn't consider native reservations. I'm somewhat torn but I think it should count, it's still part of the United States.