The state Senate could soon vote on a Democratic bill to increase protections for transgender Coloradans, however the measure faces concerns from both members of the LGTBQ community and the governor.
After an emotional, 10-hour hearing in the Senate Judiciary committee earlier this week, the panel agreed to strike the bill’s most controversial provision.
Backers have named House Bill 1312 the Kelly Loving Act, after a trans woman killed in the Club Q shooting. She was known for being authentic and unapologetic, but also struggled with substance abuse, suicidal thoughts and feelings of low self-worth.
“We want to ensure everyone lives their full lives as their best selves with dignity and without discrimination,” said Democratic Sen. Faith Winter of Broomfield, one of the bill’s main sponsors.
Wednesday’s hearing, which didn’t wrap up until early Thursday morning, was so packed that some people had to follow it from overflow areas in the State Capitol.
The bill covers a wide variety of topics, but the hours of opposition testimony largely focused on Section 2, a controversial provision dealing with child custody decisions. It would have required a court to consider a parent’s refusal to recognize their child’s transgender identity when making custody determinations. Dozens of witnesses told lawmakers that would infringe on parents’ rights, and their personal and religious beliefs and values.
Democratic Sen. Dylan Roberts of Frisco thanked Winter and other sponsors for hearing the concerns and agreeing to remove that section. He said he’s received a lot of emails and calls on the bill, and 99 percent focused on the custody issue.
“If Section 2 were still in the bill, I would have been opposed,” said Roberts. “I think it was an intrusion into the parent-child relationship that would’ve had some negative consequences.”
Republican Sen. Lisa Frizell of Castle Rock, who voted against the bill, said that section struck fear into many Coloradans.
“You have to understand the effect that this has on families,” said Frizell. “I understand that we are trying to create an environment for everyone in the state of Colorado where they feel safe. I get that.”
But she said she’s heard from people afraid of what could happen if they were unwilling to support a child who came out as transgender.
“You can’t at the same time create an environment where the vast majority of the people who live here and have children live in fear of what we are going to do in this building.”
While that change eased some concerns, the bill still faces other obstacles.
LGBTQ groups worry another provision of the bill isn’t robust enough to withstand legal challenges and could have collateral consequences
That section seeks protections for parents who bring children to Colorado for gender-affirming care. It would ban Colorado from enforcing out-of-state court orders to remove a child from their parent or guardian because they assisted that child in receiving gender-affirming care.
“At a time when transgender people are being openly persecuted, we must be prepared to craft policies that can deliver on their promises to extend protections while acknowledging that those who oppose transgender equity are particularly motivated to attack,” the Trangender Law Center, GLAD Law, PFLAG, Advocates for Trans Equality and the National Center for Lesbian Rights wrote in a letter to bill sponsors and the Senate President. The groups wrote that they want to “advance transgender equality in Colorado while preserving existing rights.”
Sen. Roberts said these groups are bringing up valid legal concerns, “about the firmness of what’s on the paper here if it were to get challenged all the way up to the U.S Supreme Court.”
Roberts noted that leading LGBTQ advocacy groups are not at this moment in support of the bill, but said, “I hope that changes.”
Governor Jared Polis’ office said they’ve shared a number of legal and policy concerns with sponsors.
The governor “believes further conversations are needed between sponsors, advocates, and caring parents to ensure our state’s needs are met, and better takes into account the complexity of family law and family dynamics. He underscores the need to consider the various viewpoints from the LGBTQ community and legal experts on this bill,” said press secretary Shelby Weiman in a statement to CPR News.
Democratic Sen. Matt Ball of Denver, another member of the Judiciary Committee, said that while the bill is still evolving, it’s important for lawmakers to remember that there’s a community under attack.
“I’d just encourage us to find something that can pass,” Ball told his colleagues during the hearing, “that can protect people in a time where that’s important, whatever it takes to get that bill across the table.”
Other provisions in House Bill 1312 would make it easier for Coloradans who have chosen an X gender marker for their state IDs to change that back to male or female
“Sometimes that causes difficulty, we heard, in getting student loans from some of the testimony and getting a passport and so there are reasons individuals might change that X back to something other than an X, but they shouldn’t have to go to court again,” Sen. Winter explained to the committee.
The measure would also allow a county clerk to issue a new marriage license to reflect a legal name change. And touches on schools — requiring them to accommodate students’ gender identity by allowing all students, regardless of gender, to access all variations of school dress codes, and to ensure school name policies to apply to all students regardless of why they want to use a different name.
The bill would also define dead-naming — when a transgender person is called by the name they used prior to transitioning — as a specific form of discrimination and harassment in some circumstances.
Republican Sen. John Carson of Douglas County said while the bill’s changes were positive he still doesn’t think the underlying legislation is necessary. He noted that the Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act already prevents discrimination based on sex, sexual orientation, gender identity and gender expression.
“I feel it’s pretty clear that we have the laws we need,” he said. “My belief is, when we have adequate laws, we should focus on enforcing those.”
Many advocates for the bill testified about the discrimination they face, and the fear they feel as the federal government moves to restrict trans rights.
Democratic Sen. Chris Kolker of Centennial, another main sponsor, said the bill is a big step for the people it aims to protect.
“To me it’s the bare minimum of what they need to feel seen and safe in our state,” Kolker said, adding it will make Colorado as a whole better off.
“We’re doing it, not only just for trans Coloradans in mind, but for the benefit of all.”
