Iowa Republicans Back a Bill that Would Strip Gender Identity from the State's Civil Rights Code

Several protesters were arrested Monday at the Iowa state Capitol, where shouts of "trans rights are human rights" reverberated throughout the building as Republican lawmakers advanced a bill that would strip the state civil rights code of protections based on gender identity.

Similar bills have been floated in recent years, but this year's passed two legislative hurdles on Monday with the support of Republicans on the state House Judiciary Committee. All Democrats and one Republican voted against advancing the bill to a vote of the full House.

Several hundred protesters filled the Capitol rotunda to chant and wave rainbow flags and signs denouncing the bill. Critics testifying during the subcommittee meeting said the bill would expose transgender Iowans to discrimination.

"It tells an entire group of Iowans – our neighbors, students, coworkers and family members – that they're not worthy of the same rights and protections as everyone else," said Mandi Remington, a county supervisor and activist in eastern Johnson County.

Iowa's civil rights law protects against discrimination in employment, wages, public accommodations, housing, education and credit practices based on a person's race, color, creed, gender identity, sex, sexual orientation, religion, national origin or disability status.

Sexual orientation and gender identity were not originally included in Iowa's Civil Rights Act of 1965. They were added by the Democratic-controlled Legislature in 2007, with about a dozen Republicans across the two chambers joining in favor.

The current bill's supporters say that was a mistake that incorrectly codified the idea that people can transition to another gender and granted transgender women access to spaces such as bathrooms, locker rooms and sports teams that should be protected for people who were assigned female at birth.

In a statement, House Speaker Pat Grassley said the full Republican caucus is considering the issue this year after a court decision cited the gender identity protection in civil rights code, threatening recently enacted "common sense" policies meant to protect such spaces.

Most Republican-led states, including Iowa, have restricted sports participation, and a dozen have passed laws restricting public bathroom access.

Since President Donald Trump returned to office, he has signed a series of executive orders regarding trans issues. They have barred people from changing the gender markers on their passports, and laid the groundwork for banning transgender people from military service and keeping transgender girls and women out of girls and women's sports competitions, among other things. Most of the policies are being challenged in court.

Amber Williams, a lobbyist for Inspired Life, which advocates for Christ-centered culture, said the bill would protect women's hard-earned right over generations "to access spaces designated to protect their dignity, privacy and safety."

"The bill provides clarity in law, ensuring that sex-based protections cannot be overridden by fluid or subjective definitions of gender," Williams said.

The Iowa bill would remove gender identity as a protected class and explicitly define female and male, as well as gender, which would be considered a synonym for sex and "shall not be considered a synonym or shorthand expression for gender identity, experienced gender, gender expression, or gender role."

About half of U.S. states include gender identity in their civil rights code to protect against discrimination in housing and public places, such as stores or restaurants, according to the Movement Advancement Project, an LGBTQ+ rights think tank.

Some additional states don't explicitly protect against such discrimination, but it is included in legal interpretation of the statutes. But Iowa's Supreme Court has expressly rejected the argument that discrimination based on sex included discrimination based on gender identity.

If successful, this would be the first time that a state would remove existing, explicit nondiscrimination statutory protections for gender identity, according to the Movement Advancement Project.

The current bill would next move to the House floor for a vote. It also would need to advance through the state Senate before Republican Gov. Kim Reynolds could sign it into law.

___

Geoff Mulvihill in Cherry Hill, New Jersey, contributed.