HB 2294 : Would have prevented state agencies like the MVD or vital records department from issuing documents with gender markers other than M or F. HB 2293 : Stipulated that schools could not require employees to respect a student’s pronouns or penalize them for misgendering students. HB 2292 : Would have mandated that Arizona birth certificates only be issued with M or F gender markers. HB 2011 : Targeted GSA clubs in schools by introducing a parental opt-in requirement and other restrictions. ![]() SB 1130 : Would have defined gender affirming care for children and vulnerable adults as a form of abuse, criminalizing providers. SB 1049 : Would have introduced $5,000 penalties against schools for violations of the parent's bill of rights, the legal cornerstone of many anti-LGBTQ+ bills. SB 1046 : Would have banned trans girls from girls sports in schools and required invasive testing and genital inspections for girls whose gender was questioned. SB 1045 : Would have banned gender-affirming care for trans youth and required school employees to out trans kids. Any of these ideas could be brought back to the table next session, so let’s review the full list. In some cases, these were more draconian versions of bills that did pass: SB 1130 would have banned gender-affirming care for both youth and vulnerable adults by classifying it as abuse and criminalizing providers, while SB 1046 (a trans student athlete ban) would have subjected cis and trans girls alike whose genders were questioned to invasive testing and genital inspections. Through organized, citizen-based advocacy, the vast majority of anti-LGBTQ+ bills introduced this session never made it out of the legislature. The current shape of the foster care system in Arizona may dull the blow of this law in effect, but it nevertheless - by opening the door to unfettered discrimination even by state-contracted agencies - sets a precedent with dangerous consequences for both LGBTQ+ families and LGBTQ+ kids. Philadelphia, this law will permit discrimination in adoption and foster care services on the basis of religious preference, under the guise of protecting religious groups from discrimination. SB 1399 : Part of a larger debate over religious liberty and non-discrimination in foster care and adoption services, including notably the Supreme Court decision Fulton v. As we look back on what brought us to this point, it’s as important as ever to point out that this is a manufactured controversy, using one of the few areas in life where the diversity of physical traits between and within genders takes on significance in order to exacerbate division by exaggerating difference. ![]() Even if trans girls did pose a problem for competitiveness in school athletics (which there is no good evidence to support), this is something that not only can and should be handled at a local and individual level, but something that has successfully been addressed for years under the Arizona Interscholastic Association’s trans-inclusive policy. Much has been made of “the solution without a problem,” but among the 170,000 student athletes in Arizona’s high schools, only 16 trans students (both boys and girls) have appealed to play in high school sports in the past five years. SB 1165 : With this bill, Arizona joined 17 other states in enacting a law to ban transgender girls from participating in school sports with their peers. ![]() The bill was subsequently revived and overhauled with a strike-everything amendment that narrowed the ban to “irreversible gender reassignment surgery.” While it is largely in line with current WPATH standards of care to limit gender-affirming surgery for patients under 18, this law introduces additional restrictions beyond those standards (which are themselves due for an update, later this year). SB 1138 : Originally written as a total ban on gender-affirming care for transgender youth (one of four total bills introduced this session with that intent), this bill faced early community opposition, and received a critical “no” vote from Senator Tyler Pace in a committee meeting. Let’s review the three anti-LGBTQ+ bills that were signed into law this session. Some ideas that we’ve successfully rebuffed before, like a law banning trans girls from school sports, found success this year, and disturbing new proposals, like the criminalization of gender-affirming care, nearly made it into law. Here in Arizona, we faced an onslaught of legislative attacks, from bills targeting kids and their support systems to book bans and preemptive restrictions on gender neutral identity documents. By sheer volume, 2022 was the worst year on record for anti-LGBTQ+ policy in state legislatures around the nation.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |