In a significant and controversial move, Iowa lawmakers have become the first in the United States to approve legislation that removes gender identity protections from the state’s civil rights code. This decision was made on Thursday amidst massive protests from opponents who argue that the legislation could expose transgender individuals to discrimination across various life domains.
The measure swiftly navigated through the legislative process after its introduction last week. The Iowa State Senate approved the bill on party lines, followed closely by the House, which voted less than an hour later. Notably, five House Republicans joined all Democrats in opposing the bill, highlighting the contentious nature of this legislative action.
This new legislation aims to eliminate gender identity as a protected class within Iowa’s civil rights law. It also seeks to explicitly define the terms female and male, asserting that "gender" will be viewed as a synonym for sex. This definition will not include terms like "gender identity," "experienced gender," "gender expression," or "gender role," effectively narrowing the scope of protections available to transgender individuals.
According to Logan Casey, director of policy research at the Movement Advancement Project—a prominent LGBTQ+ rights think tank—this bill represents the first legislative action in the U.S. aimed at removing nondiscrimination protections based on gender identity. The bill is set to be sent to Republican Governor Kim Reynolds, who has previously endorsed policies limiting transgender students' access to sports and public restrooms.
On the day of the vote, hundreds of LGBTQ+ advocates gathered in the Capitol rotunda, brandishing signs with messages like "Trans rights are human rights" and chanting "No hate in our state!" The atmosphere was charged, with a heavy police presence ensuring order. Out of 167 people who registered to testify during a public hearing, only 24 were in support of the bill, demonstrating widespread opposition.
Supporters of the legislation argue that the current law inaccurately legitimizes the concept of gender transition, allowing transgender women access to facilities such as bathrooms and sports teams that they believe should be reserved for those assigned female at birth. State Rep. Steven Holt, who managed the bill, stated that the inclusion of gender identity in civil rights codes undermines recent laws aimed at banning transgender participation in sports.
The actions taken by Iowa lawmakers contrast starkly with recent developments in other states, such as Georgia, where the House has opted against removing gender protections from the state’s hate crimes law. Iowa’s current civil rights protections extend against discrimination based on various factors, including race, color, creed, gender identity, sex, sexual orientation, religion, national origin, and disability status. Notably, sexual orientation and gender identity were added to the Iowa Civil Rights Act in 2007, thanks to a bipartisan effort.
During the debate, Iowa State Rep. Aime Wichtendahl shared her emotional testimony as a transgender woman, stating, "I transitioned to save my life." She emphasized that the intent behind the bill is to further erase transgender individuals from public life and stigmatize their existence. "The sum total of every anti-trans and anti-LGBTQ bill is to make our existence illegal," Wichtendahl declared.
Currently, approximately half of U.S. states include gender identity in their civil rights codes to protect against discrimination in housing and public accommodations. Some additional states do not explicitly provide such protections, but they are often included in legal interpretations of existing statutes. Notably, Iowa’s Supreme Court has rejected the notion that discrimination based on sex encompasses discrimination based on gender identity.
As Republican-led legislatures across the country continue to push for laws defining male and female based on biological criteria at birth, the implications of Iowa's legislative actions will likely resonate far beyond its borders, igniting further debate on transgender rights and civil liberties nationwide.
