Texas Looking to Follow North Carolina’s Shameful Lead in Targeting Transgender People
Hundreds of transgender Texans, alongside their families, friends, and colleagues, gathered in Austin on Tuesday to testify against — a bill targeting transgender individuals.
The measure, which passed the out of the Senate State Affairs Committee after a hearing that went through the night, closely resembles North Carolina’s controversial law, HB 2, which was passed last year after a one-day special session. The central purpose of the bill, like North Carolina’s, is to expel transgender people from common restrooms in schools and other public buildings.
Even though the proposed law has been condemned by businesses; major sports organizations, ; and the hundreds of transgender individuals and their families who came out to testify in opposition, the measure advanced out of committee about transgender people.
Supporters of the bill claim it is necessary to protect women and children, but the experience of schools, cities, states, medical experts, domestic violence prevention groups and women’s organizations across the country has shown these measures do nothing to protect women and children.
Indeed, by expelling transgender people from public life and sending the message to transgender youth that they are unfit to share space with their peers, laws and policies like Texas’s SB6 contribute to the disproportionately high rates of harassment, bullying, and violence that transgender individuals — particularly transgender women and girls of color — face.
Plain and simple: mandating discrimination against transgender people protects no one.
And these bills aren’t really about protecting people. At their core, measures like SB6 are predicated on a belief that transgender individuals are not real, that we are and simply incompatible with the social order. Animated by this idea, the bills attempt to — and often succeed at — pushing transgender students out of school and all transgender people out of public life.
But as a group of unions representing millions of teachers across the country explained in a brief to the Supreme Court in support of transgender teenager Gavin Grimm, “Transgender people cannot be wished away. Being transgender is not a fad. It is innate; not a choice.” Given this, the brief continues, “most educators and education policy makers understand that schools work best when they fully welcome transgender students into the educational community.”
There is such simplicity to this idea, which we have learned time and time again in our history — discrimination hurts us all.
Unfortunately, though, the movement on SB6 is just the latest in a series of setbacks over the past few weeks in the fight for transgender justice.
Wednesday morning’s committee vote in Austin came less than two days after the Supreme Court sent Gavin Grimm’s landmark transgender rights case back to a lower court to reconsider his win in a years-long fight just to use the restroom at his school. The court’s action was tied to the Trump administration’s decision last month to rescind guidance documents that had been issued by the Obama Departments of Education and Justice clarifying protections for transgender students under Title IX, the federal law banning sex discrimination in schools.
Neither the Supreme Court’s action in Gavin’s case nor the Trump administration rescission of the guidance changes the law or the legal protections that transgender students enjoy under Title IX and the Constitution. But they do send a disturbing message to the transgender young people who are just trying to go to school and survive — that they are unworthy of the same dignity and respect as their peers and should be ashamed of who they are.
Thankfully, though, those cruel messages are being drowned out by the growing and stronger messages of love and support.
Reflecting on the “two crazy, stressful, busy, breathtaking, rewarding, beautiful, fantastic years” that he has been fighting his case, Gavin Grimm on Tuesday:
“[Today] I stand stronger and prouder than ever. I stand not only with my family and friends, but with millions of supporters who stand with me. I stand with so many wonderful people at the A.C.L.U. that I proudly call my family. I know now what I did not know then; I will be fine. Regardless of what obstacles come before me, regardless of what hatred or ignorance or discrimination I face, I will be fine, because I have love on my side.”
The fight for transgender justice is “bigger than me,” Gavin concluded. “It is for all trans youth who are in school or one day will be. It is for the friends and loved ones of these youth, who want these children to be happy and healthy, rather than at risk and in danger as so many trans people are.”
With yet another front in the fight for transgender justice emerging in Texas, Gavin’s call to defend the rights of transgender youth to be happy and healthy should mobilize us to act.
It is time to #showup4transyouth in Texas and around the country. To #StandWithGavin is to carry this fight on until no transgender person fears violence or discrimination just because of who they are.
Learn More About the Issues on This Page
-
Press ReleaseDec 2024
LGBTQ Rights
President Biden Must Veto Defense Bill Attacking Military Families with Transgender YouthPresident Biden Must Veto Defense Bill Attacking Military Families with Transgender Youth
WASHINGTON — The U.S. Senate today passed a version of the National Defense Authorization Act that would ban coverage for gender-affirming care for transgender youth whose parents are active-duty military personnel. The American Civil Liberties Union is opposing final passage of the defense bill over the inclusion of this health care ban and calling on President Joe Biden to veto the bill. Section 708 of the NDAA would prohibit insurance coverage for “medical interventions for the treatment of gender dysphoria” such as hormone therapy and puberty-suppressant medications, which Speaker Mike Johnson says would “permanently ban transgender medical treatment for minors.” The same treatments would be covered by TRICARE for any medical purpose other than treating gender dysphoria, the clinical diagnosis for the psychological distress experienced by transgender people related to their gender identity. “By passing this bill, the House and Senate are forcing thousands of active-duty service members to choose between their careers in the military and the future of their transgender children,” said Mike Zamore, national director of policy & government affairs at the ACLU. “This unconscionable and unjustifiable attack on those families stands in direct contrast to President Joe Biden’s legacy of defending the civil rights of transgender Americans — including when few in his own party showed the courage to do so. President Biden should cement his legacy by vetoing this bill and sending it back to Congress to pass without Speaker Johnson’s last minute health care ban for servicemembers’ kids.” If signed by President Biden, this health care ban would be the first new anti-LGBTQ provision enacted by Congress and signed into law by the president since the enactment of the military’s since-repealed “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy for LGBTQ servicemembers and the since-repealed federal law barring recognition of same-sex marriages known as the Defense of Marriage Act. It is unknown how many transgender youth are currently enrolled in TRICARE or how many of those enrolled are currently receiving coverage for gender-affirming care. In one 2022 analysis, 2,500 minor patients sought care for gender dysphoria through TRICARE Prime insurance at military or civilian treatment facilities in 2017, and 900 received puberty suppressants or gender-affirming hormones. Earlier this month, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in a landmark case brought by the ACLU, the ACLU of Tennessee, Lambda Legal, and Akin Gump on behalf of three families and a medical provider challenging a Tennessee ban on gender-affirming hormonal therapies for transgender youth on the grounds the ban violates the Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution. -
Press ReleaseDec 2024
LGBTQ Rights
Montana Court Blocks State From Refusing to Correct Sex Markers on Transgender People's Birth Certificates and Driver's LicensesMontana Court Blocks State From Refusing to Correct Sex Markers on Transgender People's Birth Certificates and Driver's Licenses
HELENA, Mont. – A Montana court has granted a preliminary injunction preventing the state of Montana from enforcing policies that bar transgender people from obtaining accurate sex designations on their birth certificates and driver’s licenses. After a prior restriction on amendments of birth certificates was struck down by the courts, in early 2024 the state of Montana enacted a new rule that categorically bars transgender Montanans from correcting the sex designation on their birth certificates. Around the same time, the Montana Department of Justice adopted a policy similarly restricting amendment of driver’s licenses. The plaintiffs challenged these policies in state district court, arguing that they violate various constitutional provisions, including the right to equal protection of the law. In a recent Montana Supreme Court decision, two justices concluded that discrimination on the basis of transgender status – as the state is engaging in here – is a form of sex discrimination that violates the Montana Constitution’s equal protection clause. The plaintiffs, two transgender women, are represented by the American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU of Montana, and Nixon Peabody LLP. Plaintiff Jessica Kalarchik, a veteran who served in the United States Army for 31 years, said: “After finally being able to live my life openly as the woman I know myself to be, I am frustrated that my birth state, Montana, wants me to carry around a birth certificate that incorrectly lists my sex as male. I live my life openly as a woman, I am treated as a woman in my daily life, and there is no reason I should be forced to carry a birth certificate that incorrectly identifies me as male. Fortunately, the court agrees that this ridiculous policy should not be in effect.” “Once again the State of Montana chose to adopt a draconian policy that is clearly intended to marginalize transgender Montanans, only for that discriminatory action to be blocked by the courts,” said Akilah Deernose, executive director for the ACLU of Montana. “Here in Montana we treasure our right to privacy and to live our lives free from governmental intrusion. The State of Montana clearly has not learned any lessons from the past few years, where courts have repeatedly struck down unconstitutional laws targeting transgender Montanans.” “Forcing anyone to carry documents that contradict their identity unjustly violates their rights to privacy, equal treatment, and not being compelled to convey a government message about their sex that they disagree with,” said Malita Picasso, staff attorney for the ACLU’s LGBTQ & HIV Project. “Such a policy marks transgender people for further mistreatment and discrimination, essentially requiring them to carry papers that out them as transgender any time they need to provide identity documents. Fortunately, the court has refused to allow the state of Montana to subvert the freedom of transgender Montanans to control their own identity as this case goes forward.” In granting the plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction, the court held, “[i]f the challenged state actions discriminate against transgender individuals on the basis of their transgender status, they also necessarily discriminate the basis of sex.” The state has the option of appealing the district court’s ruling to the Montana Supreme Court, but the underlying case will proceed in district court. A trial has not yet been scheduled. -
FloridaDec 2024
LGBTQ Rights
Keohane v. DixonKeohane v. Dixon
On September 30, 2024, the Florida Department of Corrections rescinded its policy regarding treatment of gender dysphoria, which allowed for hormone therapy when deemed medically necessary, as well as access to clothing and grooming standards that accord with one’s gender identity. Under this new policy, grooming and clothing accommodations have been stripped away, and hormone therapy is not permitted unless an exception is deemed constitutionally required. The ACLU brought a class action challenging the policy. -
IdahoDec 2024
LGBTQ Rights
Robinson v. LabradorRobinson v. Labrador
Two incarcerated transgender women have sued the state of Idaho alleging that HB 688, a 2024 law barring state funding for gender-affirming medical care for transgender people, denies them access to the health care their doctors have prescribed for them and is a violation of their Eighth Amendment right to be free from cruel and unusual punishment. They represent a class of all incarcerated folks within the state of Idaho who face the loss of hormone therapy due to HB 668.