How the Proposed Bathroom Ban on Federal Properties Could Impact Trans Folks
This story was originally published by The 19th.
Congress has a long list of pressing priorities — including funding the federal government to prevent a shutdown — that it is likely to put off until 2025. One new item packed on that to-do list: legislation introduced by GOP Rep. Nancy Mace to ban transgender women from women’s restrooms, and transgender men from men’s restrooms, on any federal property.
The South Carolina lawmaker proposed this bill after launching a campaign to remove newly-elected Rep. Sarah McBride of Delaware from women’s restrooms on Capitol Hill. After House Speaker Mike Johnson announced a rule that effectively matched her initial proposal, Mace expanded her proposed bill to restrict the ability of all trans Americans to use restrooms, locker rooms or changing rooms on federal property across the country.
If passed into law, how would such a bill be enforced, and what would be the consequences? And what is the atmosphere like right now for transgender lobbyists and advocates who work on the Hill? The 19th spoke with multiple experts to find out.
Such a far-reaching law would mean widespread discrimination against all transgender people, experts say, although Mace’s rhetoric has singled out trans women. It would have the potential to expose trans and nonbinary people to harassment and discrimination at national parks, courthouses, IRS buildings like taxpayer assistance centers, Social Security Administration offices, and some post offices and Native American lands.
If enforceable, this federal ban would exclude trans people from spaces that are meant to be among the most accessible to Americans, said Kelly Dittmar, an associate professor of political science at Rutgers-Camden University and the director of research at the Center for American Women and Politics (CAWP).
“I would assume in this case, we’re talking about Smithsonians and other federal buildings, museums, landmarks, things that should be accessible to the population in part because they are government funded or run,” she said.
The language in Mace’s proposed bill would restrict bathroom access in “any building, land, or other real property owned, leased, or occupied by any department, agency, or instrumentality of the United States (including the Department of Defense and the United States Postal Service), or any other instrumentality wholly owned by the United States, or by any department or agency of the District of Columbia or any territory or possession of the United States.”
As the Washington Post reports, this proposal would likely impact the public libraries, recreation centers, and public schools of Washington, D.C. — which is home to a large population of LGBTQ residents and is slated to host World Pride in 2025.
Mace’s bill is unlikely to advance until the new Congress is sworn in this January, as the Senate is currently adjourned until December 2, and members are preoccupied with major defense and agricultural measures. When and if this bill does come into play, it would have to overcome a potential filibuster by Senate Democrats, despite Republicans holding a majority in each chamber. It is also unclear how much support Mace holds for this bill among Republicans.
There are no details in........
© Truthout
visit website