Bathroom Ban Laws

THE FACTS: BATHROOM SAFETY, NONDISCRIMINATION
LAWS, AND BATHROOM BAN LAWS

July 2016
National Center for

TRANSGENDER
EQUALITY
This report was authored by: Contact Information
2
Equality Federation Institute Equality Federation Institute
Equality Federation is the movement builder and 818 SW 3rd Ave. #141
strategic partner to state-based organizations Portland, OR 97204-2405
advocating for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and (929) 373-3370
queer (LGBTQ) people. We believe change is possible www.equalityfederation.org
in every community. That’s why we empower local
leaders to build a strong movement for equality that Freedom for All Americans
secures critical grassroots wins at every level. For more 1775 Pennsylvania Ave NW Suite 350
information, visit www.equalityfederation.org. Washington, DC 20006
202-601-0187
Freedom for All Americans www.freedomforallamericans.org
Freedom for All Americans is the bipartisan campaign
to secure full nondiscrimination protections for LGBT National Center for Transgender Equality
people nationwide. Bringing together Republicans 1400 16th St. NW Suite 510
and Democrats, businesses large and small, people of Washington D.C. 20036
faith, and allies from all walks of life, Freedom for All (202) 642-4542
Americans works at the federal, state, and local level www.transequality.org
to advance measures and laws protecting Americans
from discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation Movement Advancement Project (MAP)
and gender identity and expression—without allowing 2215 Market Street
overly broad and harmful religious exemptions. For more Denver, CO 80205
information, visit www.freedomforallamericans.org. 1-844-MAP-8800
www.lgbtmap.org
National Center for Transgender Equality
The National Center for Transgender Equality (NCTE) is
the nation’s leading social justice advocacy organization
winning life-saving change for transgender people.
NCTE was founded in 2003 by transgender activists who
recognized the urgent need for policy change to advance
transgender equality. For more information, visit
www.transequality.org.
Movement Advancement Project

The Movement Advancement Project (MAP) is an
independent think tank that provides rigorous
research, insight, and analysis that help speed
equality for LGBT people. MAP works collaboratively
with LGBT organizations, advocates and funders,
providing information, analysis and resources that
help coordinate and strengthen efforts for maximum
impact. MAP’s policy research informs the public and
policymakers about the legal and policy needs of LGBT
people and their families. For more information, visit
www.lgbtmap.org.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
3
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY INFOGRAPHIC.............................................................................................i
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY......................................................................................................................ii
Nondiscrimination Laws Don’t Compromise Safety—Bathroom Ban Laws Do.......................................... ii
Bathroom Ban Laws Have Other Serious Negative Consequences................................................................. ii
INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................................1
LGBT People Need Nondiscrimination Protections ............................................................................................. 1
Anti-LGBT Activists Use Bathrooms to Deny Nondiscrimination Protections.............................................. 2
NONDISCRIMINATION LAWS DON’T COMPROMISE SAFETY—BATHROOM BAN LAWS DO......8

Existing Criminal Laws Already Protect People in Restrooms and Public Spaces....................................... 8
Nondiscrimination Laws Don’t Compromise Safety ........................................................................................... 8
Bathroom Ban Laws Can’t Be Enforced Without Serious Violations of Privacy............................................ 9
Bathroom Ban Laws Compromise Public Safety.................................................................................................... 10
BATHROOM BAN LAWS HAVE OTHER SERIOUS NEGATIVE CONSEQUENCES.............................15

Violate Numerous Federal Laws................................................................................................................................. 15
Create a Hostile Business Climate and Hurt Jobs & State Economies............................................................ 18
Can Make It Impossible for Transgender People to Go About their Daily Lives.......................................... 19
RECOMMENDATIONS........................................................................................................................23
Pass (and Retain) Comprehensive Nondiscrimination Protections for LGBT People ................................ 23
Ensure Access to Restrooms in Accordance with Gender Identity.................................................................. 23
Expand Access to Single-Occupancy Restrooms.................................................................................................. 23
Implement Bathroom Safety and Availability Recommendations.................................................................. 23
Oppose Bathroom Ban Bills......................................................................................................................................... 23
CONCLUSION.....................................................................................................................................24
APPENDIX..........................................................................................................................................26
Legal Climate: Local, State, and Federal Nondiscrimination Protections for LGBT People...................... 26
ENDNOTES.........................................................................................................................................28
4
THE FACTS:
BATHROOM SAFETY, NONDISCRIMINATION i
LAWS, AND BATHROOM BAN LAWS
NONDISCRIMINATION LAWS DON’T COMPROMISE

SAFETY - BATHROOM BAN LAWS DO
EXISTING CRIMINAL LAWS NONDISCRIMINATION LAWS BATHROOM BAN LAWS

Already Protect People in Don’t Compromise Public Safety Can’t be Enforced Do Compromise
Public Spaces Without Serious Public Safety
Violations of Privacy
BATHROOM BAN LAWS HAVE OTHER SERIOUS

NEGATIVE CONSEQUENCES
VIOLATE NUMEROUS CREATE A HOSTILE BUSINESS MAKE IT IMPOSSIBLE FOR

FEDERAL LAWS CLIMATE AND HURT JOBS & TRANSGENDER PEOPLE TO GO
STATE ECONOMIES ABOUT THEIR DAILY LIVES
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Bathroom Ban Laws Have Other Serious
ii Despite widespread discrimination against lesbian, Negative Consequences
gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people, federal
and most state law still does not explicitly protect LGBT Bathroom ban laws invite lawsuits and risk loss of federal
people from discrimination in employment, housing, funding. Cities and states that pass such laws can also
and public accommodations. And anti-LGBT activists are expect an added economic burden when businesses,
using false and misguided fears about safety and privacy visitors, and even other jurisdictions reduce or restrict
in bathrooms to defeat nondiscrimination protections their travel to, and business with, the area that passed
and to restrict transgender people’s access to restrooms. the law. Finally, bathroom ban laws not only discriminate
This report provides a thorough and rational discussion against transgender people, but they also endanger
of the legal landscape pertaining to nondiscrimination their health and contribute to a climate of harassment
laws, bathroom ban laws, and restroom safety. and criminalization that puts transgender people at risk
of arrest, prosecution, incarceration, and more.
Nondiscrimination Laws Don’t
Compromise Safety—Bathroom Ban
Laws Do
Nondiscrimination laws that explicitly protect LGBT
people have been enacted in 19 states and more than
200 municipalities—with no increase in public safety
incidents. Additionally, harming someone in a restroom
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
is already illegal, and is punishable by a fine or jail time;

updating nondiscrimination laws to protect LGBT people
doesn’t change that.
By contrast, laws like North Carolina’s HB2, called

“bathroom ban laws” because they ban transgender
people from using restrooms that match the gender
they live every day, compromise public safety and can’t
be enforced without invading citizen privacy. Because
bathroom ban laws require citizens to prove their sex,
they are impossible to enforce unless the government is
willing to engage in aggressive and invasive policing of
its citizens’ use of restrooms. And the vagueness of these
laws may provide unchecked power to law enforcement
officers or even embolden private citizens to take
the law into their own hands, leading to aggressive
confrontations, interrogations, or demands that other
people using a restroom prove their sex. These laws
also leave transgender people even more vulnerable to
discrimination, harassment, and violence.
INTRODUCTION
Glossary 1
Despite widespread discrimination against lesbian,
gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people, federal Lesbian, gay, and bisexual (LGB). The terms lesbian
and most state law still does not explicitly protect LGBT and gay refer to a person’s sexual orientation and
people from discrimination in employment, housing, and describe people who are attracted to individuals
public accommodations. As advocates have advanced of the same gender. The term bisexual also refers
nondiscrimination protections covering LGBT people to a person’s sexual orientation and describes
at the federal, state, and local levels, their efforts have people who can be attracted to individuals of
met with significant backlash. First, anti-LGBT opponents more than one gender.
have tried (often successfully) to defeat or repeal
nondiscrimination protections covering LGBT people Transgender. The term transgender describes
by fostering misguided fears that these protections individuals whose sex assigned at birth is different
compromise privacy and safety in restrooms. Second, from the gender they know they are on the inside.
anti-LGBT opponents have gone on the offensive, At some point in their lives, many transgender
pushing for state and local laws that restrict transgender people decide they must live their lives as the
people’s access to restrooms (referred to as “bathroom gender they have always known themselves to be,
ban” laws throughout this report). and transition to living as that gender.
Certainly, safety and privacy in bathrooms are Gender identity and gender expression. Gender
important for everyone—including people who identity is a person’s deeply felt inner sense
are transgender. But frequently missing from these of being male, female, or along the spectrum
conversations is a considered analysis of the facts. For between male and female. Gender expression
INTRODUCTION
example, it’s already illegal to enter to restroom to refers to a person’s characteristics and behaviors
harm someone and updating nondiscrimination laws such as appearance, dress, mannerisms, and
doesn’t change that. Also, a fact-based analysis shows speech patterns that can be described as
that bathroom ban laws result in a host of negative masculine, feminine, or something else. Note that
consequences, and actually compromise, rather than gender identity and expression are different than
protect, public safety and privacy. Finally, missing from sexual orientation, and transgender people may
these conversations is a discussion of the current lack of identify as heterosexual, gay, lesbian, or bisexual.
nondiscrimination protections for LGBT people and the Gender non-conforming. This report uses the
serious consequences of legislation designed to deny an term gender non-conforming to describe a person
entire category of people access to restrooms. who has, or is perceived to have, gender-related
This report seeks to fill these voids by providing a characteristics and/or behaviors that do not conform
thorough and rational discussion of the legal landscape to traditional or societal expectations. Gender non-
pertaining to nondiscrimination laws, bathroom ban conforming people may or may not also identify as
laws, and restroom safety. lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender.
LGBT People Need Nondiscrimination Bathroom ban laws. Laws designed to restrict
transgender people’s access to restrooms by
Protections requiring people to use restrooms and facilities that
There are 9 million LGBT adults in the U.S., living correspond with the sex on their birth certificate,
in every major city and every state across the country.1 their anatomy, and/or chromosomes.
LGBT people are young and old, more likely to be low-
income, and are more racially diverse than the general places of public accommodation, which generally
population.2 LGBT people, particularly transgender include retail stores, restaurants, parks, hotels, doctors’
people, are vulnerable to being unfairly fired, kicked out offices, and banks. For example:
of their apartment, harassed at school, or denied service
in places like restaurants and stores. Many transgender •• TheNational Transgender Discrimination Survey
people face extreme levels of discrimination within found that 19% of respondents had been refused
a home or apartment because of their gender
Figure 1: Many LGBT Workers Are Denied
2 identity/expression, and 11% had been evicted for Employment or Unfairly Fired
the same reason (including 37% of African American Percent Reporting Being Unfairly Fired or Denied Employment
respondents).3
•• Researchconducted in 2013 found that opposite-
sex couples were favored over same-sex couples Lesbian, gay and 8-17%
when applying for rental housing 17% of the time.4 bisexual people
•• Between 13% and 47% of transgender workers

report being fired or denied employment because Transgender 13-47%
people
of their gender identity (see Figure 1).5
•• Between 8% and 17% of lesbian, gay, and bisexual
people report being unfairly fired or denied Source: M. V. Lee Badgett et al., “Bias in the Workplace: Consistent Evidence of Sexual Orientation
and Gender Identity Discrimination,”The Williams Institute, June 2007.
employment because of their sexual orientation as
shown in Figure 1.6
•• According to GLSEN’s National School Climate Survey, Figure 2: Bathrooms Are Unsafe for Transgender People
35% of LGBT students avoided school bathrooms
12%
because they felt unsafe or uncomfortable.7 of transgender people have
been harassed, attacked, or
•• A majority (53%) of transgender people report sexually assaulted in a bathroom
experiencing verbal harassment or disrespect in in the last year.
a place of public accommodation and 8% percent
INTRODUCTION
report being physically attacked or assaulted in

places of public accommodation.8
•• 59% of transgender people say they have avoided
bathrooms in the last year because they were afraid
of problems, such as being confronted by others;
12% of transgender people report that they have
been harassed, attacked, or sexually assaulted in a
bathroom in the last year according to preliminary
data from the U.S. Trans Survey (see Figure 2).9 59% of transgender people have avoided bathrooms
in the last year because they were afraid of problems,
•• Existing nondiscrimination protections for LGBT such as being confronted by others
people are complicated and inconsistent, varying by
Source: Harassment of Transgender People in Bathrooms and Effects of Avoiding Bathrooms:
state, court district, type and size of employer, and Preliminary Findings from the 2015 U.S. Transgender Survey, July 2016, http://www.
more. A fuller explanation of local, state, and federal ustranssurvey.org/preliminary-findings.
nondiscrimination protections for LGBT people is
found in the Appendix. However, in brief, there is Anti-LGBT Activists Use Bathrooms to
no federal law that explicitly and broadly prohibits Deny Nondiscrimination Protections
discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or
gender identity in employment, housing, or public Equal access to restrooms is an important aspect of
accommodations. Only 20 states explicitly protect nondiscrimination protections, but nondiscrimination laws
LGBT people from discrimination in employment cover more than just bathrooms. However, as a growing
and housing, and only 19 of those states protect number of cities, counties, and states pass legislation to
LGBT people from discrimination in public protect LGBT people from discrimination, anti-LGBT oppo-
accommodations (see Figure 3 on the next page). nents have tried to shift the discussion away from the need
Most Americans agree that LGBT people should be for these protections by stirring up false and baseless fears
protected from discrimination,10 so policymakers, around bathroom safety. The pace of these misleading at-
advocates, and concerned citizens across the country tacks has increased in recent months,11 likely in response to
have been working to update state and federal law the nationwide freedom to marry, paired with the growing
to include clear protections for LGBT people. visibility of LGBT people, particularly transgender people.
Figure 3 : State Nondiscrimination Laws
3
WA
NH State prohibits discrimination in employment,
ME
MT ND VT housing, and public accommodations on the
OR MN bases of sexual orientation and gender identity
ID
SD WI NY MA (19 states + D.C.)
WY MI
RI
NV NE IA PA CT State prohibits discrimination in employment,

UT IL IN
OH NJ housing, and public accommodations on the
CA CO WV
VA
DE basis of sexual orientation only (2 states)
KS MO KY MD
NC
TN
DC State prohibits discrimination in employment and
AZ OK
NM AR SC housing on the bases of sexual orientation and
GA
gender identity (1 state)
MS AL
AK TX
LA
FL
HI
Source: Movement Advancement Project, “Nondiscrimination Laws,” http://lgbtmap.org/equality-maps/non_discrimination_laws.
In some instances, anti-LGBT activists have For example, in response to a local LGBT
turned to fears around bathrooms to defeat positive nondiscrimination ordinance recently passed in
nondiscrimination protections. As a recent example, in Charlotte, the state legislature of North Carolina passed
Houston, Texas, anti-LGBT opponents ran a campaign a law barring transgender people from using restrooms
to challenge a 2014 nondiscrimination ordinance that match the gender they live every day. Under the
that prohibited discrimination across a wide range of law (North Carolina House Bill 2, or “HB2” throughout the
institutions (including city and private employment, report), all multiple-occupancy restrooms at public schools
city services, housing, and public accommodations) and public agencies may only be used by individuals in
based on sex, race, color, ethnicity, age, military accordance with the sex listed on their birth certificate.14
INTRODUCTION
status, disability, pregnancy, genetic information, This kind of law makes it impossible for transgender people
religion, sexual orientation, and gender identity.12 to go about their daily lives like other people—and it opens
Opponents’ campaign, which falsely claimed that the door to abuse, harassment, and even violence.
nondiscrimination protections would jeopardize
Bathroom ban bills and laws like the one in North
people’s safety and privacy, successfully invalidated
Carolina take many forms (as described in the sidebar
Houston’s ordinance in 2015.13
on page 4). For example, the city of Oxford, Alabama,
In other instances, anti-LGBT activists have recently passed a law requiring that people in places
proposed harmful legislation that attempts to regulate of public accommodation use the bathroom according
bathroom use based on the sex a person was thought to the sex marked on their birth certificates.15 The law
to be when they were born. Whatever form bathroom in Oxford assigned a penalty of $500 and/or six months
ban bills take, these proposals make it impossible for in jail to anyone caught in the bathroom that did not
most transgender people to access public restrooms. correspond to their birth certificate.16 After great public
Why? Because bathroom ban laws explicitly or outcry, the law was recalled before it took effect.17
effectively force transgender people into restrooms
Just this past legislative session, over 40 such bills like
inconsistent with their gender (risking their safety),
those passed in North Carolina and Oxford, Alabama, were
stigmatize transgender people by requiring them
proposed in almost half of states across the country. The law
to use segregated restrooms (which generally aren’t
in North Carolina is, as of publication, under severe scrutiny
available), or force transgender people to refrain from
by the public and by the federal government.18 See page 8
using public restrooms altogether (causing physical
for a discussion of why bathroom ban laws like the one in
and mental health problems).
North Carolina are harmful and impossible to enforce.
4 Bathroom Ban Bills Vary in How They Restrict Restroom Access
1. Facilities covered. Proposed bathroom ban laws vary in scope. Some cover all bathrooms and changing
facilities outside the home including those in schools, private businesses, government buildings, parks,
restaurants, and all other places of public accommodation. Other laws more narrowly target certain facilities,
like facilities in schools or government buildings.
2. Definition of “sex.” Many bathroom ban bills and laws define “sex” as “the physical condition of being male
or female,” and say that “sex” can be determined by a person’s physical anatomy or chromosomes.18 Some
define “sex” as the sex recorded on a person’s birth certificate.20 A bill considered in South Carolina states
that a person’s “original birth certificate may be relied upon as definitive evidence of an individual’s sex.”21
Regardless of how “sex” is defined, the purpose of these bills is to force people to use restrooms according to
the sex on a person’s birth certificate, rather than the gender they live as every day.
3. Proof or verification of sex. To date, bathroom ban bills have not clarified how a person’s sex would be verified.
In states where “sex” is defined according to a person’s birth certificate, the law could not be reliably enforced
unless adults and students carry their birth certificate with them and produce it when necessary to prove
they are in the correct restroom. States that have attempted to pass bills regulating restroom use according to
physical anatomy or chromosomes have not clarified how students and adults would demonstrate what their
anatomy or chromosomes are. So far, most bathroom ban bills have also typically not specified who is tasked
with verifying people’s sex, nor have the bills provided funding for enforcement.
4. Business requirements. Some proposed bathroom ban bills create a legal requirement for business owners
INTRODUCTION
or public agencies to prevent someone from using a restroom that doesn’t match the sex on their original
birth certificate.22 Other laws offer legal protection to business owners, individuals, or public agencies and
officials who prevent transgender people from using bathrooms according to their gender identity.23 No bill to
date has specified how a business should monitor customers’ restroom usage. However, some bills financially
penalize business owners or public agencies that do not enforce these laws. The law proposed (but withdrawn)
in Rockwall, Texas, would have assigned a $500 fine to “any person in violation of this ordinance,” including
“the owner, operator, or any employee of any facility that contains a single-sex multiple-occupancy restroom/
bathroom” who “knowingly” lets a transgender person use the restroom that matches their gender identity.24
5. Schools. Requirements for schools also vary, though most bills mandate that a school district prohibit
students from entering a restroom designated for the opposite sex25 without providing clear mechanisms
of enforcement.26 Some proposed bills set schools up for lawsuits by creating a private right to sue for a
student who may have been in the restroom when a student of the “opposite sex” entered the room.27 In
Oklahoma, proposed legislation would permit the state school board to withhold state educational funding
to any school district that adopted a transgender-inclusive school facilities policy.28 These bills do not provide
schools with funding for enforcement, nor do they address what will happen if a school loses federal funding
because they violated federal law by following state law.
6. Bounty provision. Some laws offer monetary damages to people who report encountering someone who is
using the “wrong” restroom. For example, in Kansas, a proposed bill would entitle a student who “encounters a
person of the opposite sex” to statutory damages of up to $2,500 “for each instance,” as well as other monetary
damages, even if the transgender student was simply minding their own business.29 These provisions set up
an effective bounty system for private citizens to harass and demand proof of sex from people who don’t
conform to their stereotypes of what men and women should look like.
Bathroom Ban Bills Vary in How They Restrict Restroom Access (continued) 5
7. Penalties for those who violate the law. Most proposed bathroom ban legislation does not clarify what the
penalty is for violating the law. Legislation proposed in Indiana makes it a misdemeanor to “knowingly enter
a single-sex public facility designated to be used only by [the opposite sex],” punishable by a fine or jail time.30
Similarly, Mississippi legislators proposed a bill that would make it a felony/misdemeanor to “knowingly
and intentionally enter into restroom facilities . . . that were designated for use by the gender opposite the
person’s gender at birth.”31 Oxford, Alabama’s recalled ordinance made violation of the law punishable by
a $500 fine or up to six months in jail.32 And a pair of bills in Virginia would have permitted police to issue
summons to violators of the proposed laws, for a civil penalty of up to $50 for a willful violation.33
8. Exceptions. Many proposed bills list exceptions for whom the bathroom ban law would not apply, such
as children under age 10 accompanied by an adult, emergency medical personnel, people cleaning the
facilities, and people with disabilities or their assistants.
9. Single-occupancy restrooms. A number of proposed bills allow schools to let transgender students use
single-occupancy restrooms in some circumstances. In Illinois for example, if a transgender student submits
a written request from their parents, the school “may provide reasonable accommodation . . . to use a single-
occupancy restroom or changing room or the regulated use of a faculty restroom or changing room.”34
Segregating transgender students into single-occupancy restrooms is not a “reasonable accommodation”:
it singles transgender students out and reinforces the notion that transgender students compromise the
safety and privacy of their peers. Also, for many transgender students, there aren’t enough—or any—single-
INTRODUCTION
user restrooms at their school for that to be a viable alternative.
10. Other extreme provisions. Many proposed bathroom ban laws take an extreme position. For example:
•• A bill proposed in Oklahoma would require schools to construct or set aside multi-user facilities where no
transgender people are allowed if any student or their parent to claims that potentially sharing a restroom
with a transgender students violates their religious beliefs.35
•• A Tennessee bill mandates that students use the restrooms and locker rooms that are designated for use by
students “of the same sex as the sex indicated on the student’s original birth certificate” (emphasis added),
meaning that even transgender students who have undergone gender transition and have changed
the gender marker on their birth certificate (through onerous processes) cannot use the restroom that
corresponds to the gender they live every day.36
6 Public Bathrooms Have Often Been Used as an Argument to Oppose Equality
Despite a universal need to use the restroom, access to public restrooms has been a frequent battleground,
from workers’ rights at the turn of the 20th century to the fight for gender equality in the workplace, from
the lingering impact of Jim Crow legislation, through the desegregation of American public schools, to the
current movement for LGBT equality. Those fighting against public restroom use often hang their argument
on the specter of “safety,” especially the safety of women and girls. History has shown that these fears and
concerns around bathrooms are unfounded. Everyone should be allowed to access restrooms without fear of
discrimination or prosecution.
The first sex-segregated restrooms in the United States were mandated for workers by Massachusetts law
in 1887.37 According to research cited in Time magazine, these laws were bolstered by claims of protecting
women, new to the workplace in the late 1800s, from the “harsh realities of the public sphere”—a paternalistic
view taken by lawmakers who were exclusively male.38 Employers continued to be reluctant to hire women,
even more once it meant building new facilities. Regardless, building codes incorporated the “Separate Sphere”
philosophy into many areas of public life, mandating sex-segregated waiting rooms, libraries, etc.39 These laws
informed today’s modern plumbing codes, one reason sex-segregated restrooms persist into modern times in
the United States (though, by comparison, restrooms are rarely sex-segregated in Europe).40
Around the same time that workplace facilities were being built for and segregated by sex, Jim Crow laws
were expanding across the United States, prohibiting black people and other people of color from using the
same public facilities—including restrooms—as white people. In 1966, civil rights activist Sammy Younge, Jr.
INTRODUCTION
was murdered for trying to use a “whites only” restroom in Tuskegee, Alabama.41 When President Franklin D.
Roosevelt signed the executive order prohibiting racial discrimination in government employment, some white
women joined opponents of integration, voicing reluctance to use the same facilities as women of color.42
Likewise, as schools were racially integrated, opponents of integration often used paternalistic messages to
stir up fear.43 Segregationists claimed that integration of schools would prohibit white female students from
using the bathroom, to avoid sharing facilities with girls of color.44 Similarly, during the initial advocacy for
the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA), opponents used the false claim that the amendment would desegregate
restrooms by sex to stir up opposition.45
This is not the first time that we have seen discriminatory responses to historic moments of progress for our
nation. We saw it in the Jim Crow laws that followed the Emancipation Proclamation. We saw it in fierce
and widespread resistance to Brown v. Board of Education.
- Loretta Lynch
United States Attorney General, in her remarks announcing the Department
of Justice’s Complaint against the State of North Carolina 46
Misguided fears that treating people equally will compromise people’s safety and privacy in restrooms have
been used for decades as a reason to treat people unfairly. But those fears are as unfounded as they were in
the 1880s, 1920s, 1940s, and 1960s.
NONDISCRIMINATION LAWS DON’T
COMPROMISE SAFETY - BATHROOM BAN LAWS DO 7
EXISTING CRIMINAL LAWS

ALREADY PROTECT PEOPLE IN PUBLIC SPACES
• Criminal and civil laws already protect public spaces
• Harassment, assault, misconduct in restrooms is already illegal
NONDISCRIMINATION LAWS
DON’T COMPROMISE PUBLIC SAFETY
• 20 states have nondiscrimination laws with NO increase in public safety incidents
• Harassment, assault, misconduct in restrooms is already illegal
BATHROOM BAN LAWS
DO COMPROMISE CAN’T BE ENFORCED WITHOUT SERIOUS

PUBLIC SAFETY VIOLATIONS OF PRIVACY
Embolden Citizen Put Transgender and How Would the State Who Would be Responsible for
Vigilantes Gender-Nonconforming People Verify Someone’s Sex? Verifying Someone’s Sex?
and Students at Particular Risk
BATHROOM BAN LAWS HAVE OTHER SERIOUS NEGATIVE CONSEQUENCES, TOO.

NONDISCRIMINATION LAWS DON’T Nondiscrimination Laws Don’t
8
COMPROMISE SAFETY—BATHROOM Compromise Safety
BAN LAWS DO Some opponents of LGBT equality have argued
Safety and privacy in places like restrooms are that nondiscrimination laws open the door to sexual
important to everyone. However, contrary to the predators. This is not borne out by fact. Nondiscrimination
arguments made by anti-LGBT activists, passing laws that explicitly protect LGBT people in employment,
nondiscrimination protections for LGBT people does not housing, and public accommodations have been around
compromise safety and privacy. Ironically, it is bathroom for a long time. They have been enacted in 19 states51
ban laws that compromise public safety and privacy—for and more than 200 municipalities—with no increase
everyone—in their effort to limit transgender people’s in public safety incidents.52 In 2014, Media Matters
NONDISCRIMINATION LAWS DON’T COMPROMISE SAFETY—BATHROOM BAN LAWS DO
access to restrooms. contacted law enforcement officials in 12 of the states

that prohibit discrimination against transgender people
Existing Criminal Laws Already Protect in places of public accommodation.53 Not one state
People in Restrooms and Public Spaces reported that the law had led to an increase in criminal
activity in bathrooms (see Figure 4 on the next page).
Harming someone in a restroom is already illegal,
This makes sense because passing nondiscrimination
and is punishable by a fine or jail time. Law enforcement
protections has no impact on existing laws that
officers use these laws to hold perpetrators accountable
criminalize harmful behavior in bathrooms. So regardless
and keep people safe. Updating our nondiscrimination
of whether a state has a nondiscrimination law in place,
laws to protect LGBT people doesn’t change that. In fact,
entering a restroom to harm another person remains
current criminal and civil laws include clear protections
a crime. That doesn’t mean that no one will ever break
in public spaces, and in many cases include specific
the law. It simply means that passing nondiscrimination
protections against misconduct in restrooms. For example,
protections has no impact on whether or not people will
in North Carolina, since long before HB2 was passed:
choose to break other criminal laws guarding against
•• It is a crime to assault another person, in a restroom assault and harassment.
or elsewhere.47
•• Itis a crime to sexually assault someone, in a
restroom or elsewhere.48 I know that this concern persists but I personally
have not seen any factual basis for it.
•• Itis a crime to secretly film someone without
their consent where that person has a reasonable
expectation of privacy (like in a restroom or changing I am not aware of any increased sexual assault or
room).49 rape in women’s restrooms as a result of Maine’s
2005 adoption of protections in the Maine
•• It is a crime to invade someone’s privacy to secretly
peep on someone while they are changing or using Human Rights Act for sexual orientation (which,
the restroom.50 in Maine, includes “a person’s actual or perceived
Regardless of whether someone is permitted to be in heterosexuality, bisexuality, homosexuality or
a specific restroom, if an individual commits or attempts gender identity or expression”).
to commit an illegal action in that restroom, they can
and should be held accountable. - Amy Sneirson
Executive Director of the Maine
Human Rights Commission 54
it is difficult to tell who is transgender by simply looking
Figure 4: No Increase in Public Safety Incidents
at a person, the only way to determine if a person is 9
in the “correct” bathroom as specified by such a law
NOT ONE STATE would be to require everyone in the state to carry their
birth certificate with them at all times and to produce
it on demand. This would at the very least be a gross
o
government overreach, and would arguably also be an
unconstitutional invasion of privacy.
Other bills define sex according to chromosomal
makeup. For example, a bill has been introduced in

Indiana that would criminalize “knowingly or intentionally
enter[ing] a single sex public facility that is designated” for
the opposite sex. This bill defines female as “an individual
who: (1) was born female at birth; or (2) has at least one
(1) X chromosome and no Y chromosome.”56 Contrary
to popular belief, it’s also not always possible to guess
with a nondiscrimination law protecting against what someone’s chromosomes are simply by looking
discrimination in places of public acommodation has at a person, and many non-transgender people have
reported that the law has led to an increase in criminal chromosomes that are different than what they might
activity in bathrooms. expect, often without even knowing it. The only way to
Source: Carlos Maza and Luke Brinker, “15 Experts Debunk Right-Wing Transgender reliably enforce this law would be to require everyone to
Bathroom Myth,” Media Matters for America, March 20, 2014, http://mediamatters.org/ undergo chromosome testing. But again, any procedure
research/2014/03/20/15-experts-debunk-right-wing-transgender-bathro/198533.
that involves examining a person’s chromosomes, through
a blood test and genetic testing, in order to access public
Bathroom Ban Laws Can’t Be Enforced restrooms would be clear government overreach and an
Without Serious Violations of Privacy unconstitutional invasion of privacy.
Constructed in vague and over-broad terms, laws Most bathroom ban bills also fail to address how they
like North Carolina’s HB2 are impossible to enforce would be enforced when it comes to people with intersex
unless the government is willing to engage in aggressive conditions—people who have chromosomal, anatomical,
and invasive policing of its citizens’ use of restrooms. But and/or hormonal conditions that mean they do not fit the
almost all of the bathroom ban laws proposed this year common definitions of male or female. Approximately
have no clear mechanism to indicate how such a law will one in 2,000 people is born with an intersex condition,
be enforced or who is supposed to enforce the law. though many people only discover it later in life. Intersex
people may have chromosomal variations such as some
How Would the State Verify Someone’s “Sex”? XX cells and some XY cells, or chromosomes that do not
correspond to their anatomy. Birth certificates generally
Proponents of bathroom ban laws want to force require doctors to assign intersex babies a male or female
people to use restrooms according to their “sex,” sex, but that gender may not match the individual’s
but their simplistic and inaccurate definition of sex appearance or gender identity as they grow up.
creates problems for everyone. Existing and proposed
bathroom ban laws define sex in various ways, but often Finally, bathroom ban bills offer no procedure for
rely on birth certificates, anatomy, or chromosomes for when a person’s “sex” or gender is unclear to another
proof of sex. The legislation passed in North Carolina, individual in a restroom. Some transgender people and
for example, defines “biological sex” as the sex marked people who identify as gender non-conforming may also
on a person’s birth certificate.55,a The legislation aims fall into this category, but so may many non-transgender
to force transgender people to use the restroom that people. That is, women who may look masculine, men
matches the sex on their birth certificate, rather than who may look feminine, or any other person who simply
the restroom that matches their gender identity and
external appearance. However, because most of the time a
See page 16 for a full discussion of the legal challenges to the law in North Carolina.
has an appearance or manner of dress that doesn’t
10 conform to gender stereotypes may be seen as being
The only way for us be able to enforce HB2
in the “wrong” restroom. Consider a woman undergoing
would [be] to actually have officers posted outside
cancer treatment who has lost her hair; or a man with
long hair, more feminine facial features, and a slight of public restrooms requesting someone’s birth
build; or a female athlete with short hair. In fact, non- certificate. And I know for certain that we could
transgender women who have a more masculine not do that. That would take everyone that we
appearance or way of dressing (including some lesbian have on staff. It would take them off the streets,
and bisexual women) often face harassment and even
off patrol and having to put them at bathrooms.
violence because they are perceived to be in the wrong
restroom.57 As scrutiny as to who “belongs” in a particular
restroom increases because of state or local legislation, - Christina Hallingse

so does the likelihood that individuals such as these may Public Information Officer, Asheville,
also be interrogated, harassed, or even restricted from North Carolina Police Department 60
using a restroom—even when that restroom matches
their sex as defined by their birth certificate.
law “because ‘the bill doesn’t speak to enforcement []
See the next page for examples of citizen vigilantes
or penalty.’”61 Asheville police commented that they
taking enforcement too far.
would be unable to enforce the law without taking
Who Would Be Responsible for Verifying “everyone that we have on staff” off the streets in
Someone’s “Sex”? order to have them police bathrooms.62
Bathroom ban bills and statutes are unclear on who Offering a rare clarification, the fiscal note of a
is tasked with enforcement, leaving the law open to proposed law in Tennessee calculates that universities
dangerous misuse by business owners, law enforcement, could hire a full time staff member to collect and record
security guards, or even private citizens. birth certificates and monitor bathroom use, at an
estimated cost of about $54,000 per university.63 The bill
For example, in North Carolina, the law now mandates does not provide additional funding to cover the cost.
that schools prevent students from using bathrooms and
changing facilities that don’t match the gender marked Finally, bathroom ban laws and bills rarely include
on their birth certificates. The law does not, however, mechanisms for ensuring compliance. If a public
indicate how schools should enforce the law. Are schools agency or school is not compliant with a law—for
expected to hire bathroom monitors to check students’ example, if they are not checking to make sure that all
gender? Would they use private security companies? Are students and all employees and visitors are using the
teachers expected to play this role? restroom that aligns with their “biological sex”— these
laws do not indicate what penalties will be incurred. It
Public agencies are also bound by the law and is unclear if a public school or state agency risks losing
face the same challenges. It is unclear whether public public funding, or if the state will step in to make sure
agency officials need to hire private security to screen that the law is enforced using tax-payer dollars to pay
people outside of bathrooms, or if state or municipal for security officers or law enforcement.
law enforcement will be tasked with enforcing the law.
Regardless, the law provides no funding to schools, public Bathroom Ban Laws Compromise Public
agencies, or even police departments for enforcement. Safety
In fact, police departments across the state of Despite the assertions of politicians pushing
North Carolina are themselves unsure as to how to bathroom legislation, bathroom ban laws do not increase
enforce the new law. National Public Radio reached safety in public restrooms. In fact, these laws compromise
out to 10 police departments, most of which refused safety, not just for transgender people and gender non-
to comment.58 But four departments confirmed that conforming people, but also for women and children (the
they did not know how to go about enforcing the very people proponents of bathroom ban laws claim to
law.59 Raleigh police shared they would not enforce the be most worried about). The vagueness of the laws may
Sexual Assault Prevention Organizations Support Nondiscrimination Protections for Transgender People 11
Amid the national uproar over bathroom ban laws, more than 300 of the nation’s leading sexual assault and
domestic violence prevention organizations released a statement in April 2016 calling for an end to legislation
that harms transgender people and excludes them from restrooms and other facilities. The statement read in part:
“States across the country have introduced harmful legislation or initiatives that seek to repeal
nondiscrimination protections or restrict transgender people’s access to gender-specific facilities like
restrooms. Those who are pushing these proposals have claimed that these proposals are necessary for
public safety and to prevent sexual violence against women and children. As rape crisis centers, shelters,

and other service providers who work each and every day to meet the needs of all survivors and reduce
sexual assault and domestic violence throughout society, we speak from experience and expertise when
we state that these claims are false.
“Nondiscrimination laws do not allow men to go into women’s restrooms—period. The claim that allowing
transgender people to use the facilities that match the gender they live every day allows men into
women’s bathrooms or women into men’s is based either on a flawed understanding of what it means to
be transgender or a misrepresentation of the law.
“As advocates committed to ending sexual assault and domestic violence of every kind, we will never
support any law or policy that could put anyone at greater risk for assault or harassment. That is why we
are able to strongly support transgender-inclusive nondiscrimination protections—and why we oppose
any law that would jeopardize the safety of transgender people by forcing them into restrooms that do not
align with the gender they live every day.”
To read the full statement and see the entire list of supporting organizations, visit http://endsexualviolence.
org/files/NTFNationalConsensusStmtTransAccessWithSignatories.pdf.
provide unchecked power to law enforcement officers

or even embolden private citizens to take the law into
I’ve had people call me all sorts of names for
their own hands, leading to aggressive confrontations,
having short hair. I’ve had people call me a boy,
interrogations, or demands that other people using a
restroom prove their sex. I’ve had people call me a dyke, I’ve had people call
me gay. I’m grateful that that woman only called
Embolden Citizen Vigilantes me disgusting and didn’t physically attack me.
Proposed legislation in some states, such as Kansas,
includes a “bounty provision”: monetary damages that - Aimee Toms
private citizens could claim if they encounter someone Danbury, Connecticut,
who was not using the facility in accordance with the sex
referring to a stranger who verbally harassed her 67
on their birth certificate.64 Such provisions encourage
citizen policing and heighten the harassment and risk
of physical assault that transgender and gender non-
Policies and rhetoric like this exacerbate the high rates
conforming people frequently experience.
of discrimination, bullying, and harassment transgender
In direct response to the bathroom ban law passed in students already face at school.68 According to GLSEN’s
North Carolina, one school district in the state passed (but bi-annual School Climate Survey, 23% of responding
then ultimately reversed) a policy permitting students LGBT students reported being physically harassed based
to carry pepper spray.65 A member of the school board on their gender expression and 11% reported being
stated that the policy could be used for students who physically assaulted based on their gender expression.69 By
might encounter a transgender person in the bathroom.66 encouraging violence against transgender students, these
12 Shocking Public Statements Encourage Violence against Transgender People
As part of the national conversation around transgender people and bathrooms, some public figures have made
explicit statements suggesting or threatening violence against transgender and gender non-conforming people. A
sampling of these statements includes:
•• “The first man who goes into the restroom with my daughter will not have to worry about surgery.” – Nashville
Fire Dept. EMS District Chief Tim Lankford, in a later-deleted, May 20, 2016 Facebook post70
•• “If my little girl is in a public women’s restroom and a man, regardless of how he may identify, goes into the
bathroom, he will then identify as a John Doe until he wakes up in whatever hospital he may be taken to.” –
Tracy Murphree, GOP nominee for Denton County, TX Sheriff, April 22, 201671
•• “I’m taking a Glock .45 to the ladies room. It identifies as my bodyguard. #BoycottTarget @Target” – Liberty
Counsel President Anita Staver, commenting on Target’s transgender-friendly restroom policy, April 22, 201672
•• “I’ll be honest with you, I don’t even know why there’s an issue about which bathroom to use. Because if you
are a guy and you go into bathroom with my wife, I’m gonna make the news—I know there’s three cameras
rolling—I’m gonna whip your tail if you go in there with my wife while she’s trying to use the bathroom, or
my granddaughter.” – Spartanburg County, SC Sheriff Chuck Wright, April 8, 201673
•• “I will tell you what, the first man that walks in my daughter’s bathroom, he ain’t going to have to worry about
surgery.” – Family Research Council Executive Vice President and Lt. Gen. (ret.) Jerry Boykin, March 5, 201674
•• “If this [a transgender girl using a girls’ locker room] ever happens in a school that my kids attend, I’ll be first
in line to issue a [sic] ass whooping, both to the transgender, and the administration whom failed to protect
our children.” – Dallas, OR City Councilor Micky Garus, November 5, 201575
•• “I believe if I was standing at a dressing room and my wife or one of my daughters was in the dressing room and a
man tried to go in there—I don’t care if he thinks he’s a woman and tries on clothes with them in there—I’d just try
to stomp a mudhole in him and then stomp him dry.” – Tennessee State Rep. Richard Floyd (now retired), January
12, 201276
laws do not increase safety in schools and rather reduce Put Transgender and Gender-Nonconforming
safety for transgender students—as well as any student People and Students at Particular Risk
that doesn’t appear stereotypically male or female.
Public restrooms are already unsafe for transgender
Multiple news reports have surfaced, even from and gender non-conforming people. In a study of
states without bathroom ban laws, of private citizens transgender and gender non-conforming people
harassing people in public restrooms on the premise living in the District of Columbia, 70% reported being
that they are using the “wrong” restroom.” In Frisco, denied access to a restroom or being verbally harassed
Texas, a man followed a woman into the restroom at a or physically assaulted.82 More than two-thirds of
hospital because she “dressed like a man.”77 She was respondents (68%) had been told they were in the
wearing basketball shorts and a t-shirt.78 wrong facility, were told to leave, were questioned
about their gender, were ridiculed or made fun, or
In Danbury, Connecticut, a young woman who
otherwise verbally harassed or stared at or given strange
had recently donated her hair to cancer patients was
looks.83 Preliminary data from the National Center for
approached by a stranger who yelled anti-transgender
Transgender Equality found that in the last year, 24%
insults and epithets at her.79 In May, a private security
of transgender people were told, or asked if, they were
guard in a D.C. grocery store harassed a transgender
using the wrong restroom and 9% say they were denied
woman trying to use the women’s restroom.80 The guard
access to the appropriate restroom (see Figure 5 on the
was arrested and charged with simple assault after
next page).84
allegedly pushing the woman out of the bathroom.81
Transgender and gender non-conforming students
also already face daily harassment and even violence at 13
As a transgender student myself, I know what it
school. Bathroom bans only add to students’ anguish
is like to be isolated because of who I am. While
by forcing them to choose between harassment and
humiliation in the school bathroom or “holding it” until in high school, I was told that I could only use
they get home for the day, sometimes 10 or more hours the restroom in the nurse’s office. This was
with after-school programming. According to the National inconvenient not only because the nurse’s office
Transgender Discrimination Survey, 26% of respondents was across campus from many of my classes, but
were denied access to gender appropriate bathrooms at
it was also locked much of the time.
school.85 In GLSEN’s National School Climate Survey, 59%
of transgender students reported being required to use

the bathroom or locker room of the sex on their identity If I was late to class because I had to use the
documents, not their gender identity.86 restroom, I would be punished. What was worse
than the inconvenience was the isolation I felt as a
transgender teenager. My high school separated me
Providence is removing barriers and making
from my classmates simply because of who I am.
a difference for our transgender and gender
expansive students. This policy [providing access
- Casey O’Dea
to facilities for transgender students] strengthens
Senior at the University of New Hampshire
the commitments made in Providence, in the state
and president of Trans UNH 88
[of Rhode Island] and by President Obama to
make our schools more inclusive and welcoming
to all students. It is the right thing to do, and I
Many Schools Around the Country are Safely
am proud that Providence is helping lead the way.
and Competently Meeting the Needs of
Transgender Students
- Mayor Jorge O Elorza
Providence, Rhode Island 87
Most schools make it a priority to ensure that every
student feels valued and respected, including
transgender students. School districts across the
Figure 5: Transgender People Face Harassment In Restrooms country have successfully worked with transgender
and non-transgender students to come up with
respectful and inclusive policies that balance
everyone’s needs and concerns. Ten states, as well
as numerous cities and school districts across
the country, have explicit policies respecting
transgender students’ right to access restrooms
corresponding to their gender identity.89
24%
of transgender people were
9%
were denied access
In May 2016, the Departments of Education and
Justice issued a joint guidance clarifying that
Title IX’s protections against sex discrimination in
told or asked if they were in to the appropriate
the wrong bathroom restroom education meant that transgender students must be
permitted to use facilities that correspond to their
gender identity.90 The guidance included numerous
examples of schools that were already letting
Source: Harassment of Transgender People in Bathrooms and Effects of Avoiding Bathrooms: transgender students use the right restrooms,
Preliminary Findings from the 2015 U.S. Transgender Survey, July 2016, http://www.
ustranssurvey.org/preliminary-findings. without any problems.
BATHROOM BAN LAWS
HAVE SERIOUS NEGATIVE CONSEQUENCES
14
VIOLATE PRIVACY AND COMPROMISE SAFETY

• Leave Vague Who Can and How to Verify Someone’s Sex
• Embolden Citizen Vigilantes and Endanger Transgender People
VIOLATE FEDERAL LAW ON MANY LEVELS
Risk Loss of Federal

Saddle States with
Expose Employers to Education, Health,
Federal Lawsuits Jobs, and Violence $ Huge Litigation Costs
at Taxpayer Expense
Prevention Funding
CREATE HOSTILE BUSINESS CLIMATE AND HURT

JOBS & STATE ECONOMIES
BATHROOM BAN LAWS CREATE UNFAVORABLE BUSINESS ENVIRONMENTS BECAUSE
• They are vague in terms of enforcement and business responsibility,
• They increase the risk of lawsuits,
• They create unwelcome atmospheres for employees and customers, and
• They make it harder to recruit the best and brightest talent.
MAKE IT IMPOSSIBLE FOR TRANSGENDER

PEOPLE TO GO ABOUT THEIR DAILY LIVES
Birth Certificate
Endanger the Health
Requirements Leave Contribute to the
of Transgender and
Many Transgender Criminalization of
Gender Non-
People Unable to Safely Transgender People
Conforming People
Use Public Restrooms
BATHROOM BAN LAWS HAVE
OTHER SERIOUS NEGATIVE Please flag any investments in [North Carolina] 15
CONSEQUENCES that come through as I am not comfortable

In addition to compromising privacy and safety, deploying dollars into startups there until the
bathroom ban laws have a host of other serious negative voters there fix this.
consequences for the states and cities that pass them.
They invite lawsuits and risk loss of federal funding. I have great faith in the people there and a lot of
Cities and states that pass such laws can also expect an affinity for the state and its people. I am hopeful
added economic burden when businesses, visitors, and
this will be repealed quickly.
even other jurisdictions reduce or restrict their travel to,
and business with, the area that passed the law.
- Bill Maris
Violate Numerous Federal Laws
BATHROOM BAN LAWS HAVE OTHER SERIOUS NEGATIVE CONSEQUENCES

CEO of Google Ventures, in a note to the firm’s
As described on the next pages, bathroom ban laws partners restricting investment to North Carolina 94
that discriminate on the basis of sex (including gender
identity and gender expression) require schools and
business to violate federal law, including Title VII, Title incurred by the victim as a result of the discrimination
IX, and the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA). Along (for example, the cost of finding and securing another
with putting millions of dollars of federal funding at job) and compensation for emotional harm suffered
risk, these laws force state taxpayers to shoulder the by the victim. Punitive damages can be awarded if an
burden of paying for the legal fees spent defending employer was found guilty of particularly reckless or
bathroom ban laws in court. harmful discrimination.
Although there are caps on compensatory and
Expose Employers to Federal Lawsuits punitive damages depending on the size of the
The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission employer,95 these costs can add up for employers
(EEOC) has found that, under Title VII of the Civil Rights in a state that requires its businesses and municipal
Act, it is illegal for employers to bar transgender employers to violate the EEOC’s rulings or (depending
employees from using restrooms consistent with on the federal court district) similar federal court
their gender identity.91 As noted in the Department rulings. For municipal employers, these damages will
of Justice’s complaint against the State of North be paid for by the taxpayers. The EEOC has specifically
Carolina, “access to bathrooms and changing facilities stated that “contrary state law” is not a defense against
in the workplace at public agencies in the State of a charge of sex discrimination under Title VII.96
North Carolina is a term, condition and privilege
Bathroom laws also put employers in an impossible
of employment and, therefore, is covered by the
situation: If an employer or the owner of a place of public
nondiscrimination mandate of Title VII.”92
accommodation disagrees with the law or even simply
Although EEOC rulings are not binding on private feels that it would be too difficult, time-consuming, or
employers, most employers abide by them, and intrusive to enforce the law on customers or employees,
those who do not may end up in federal court (which that employer or owner risks breaking state law and
generally, though not always, gives deference to the incurring any penalties under the law. On the other hand,
EEOC). So employers who violate Title VII, including if an employer or owner agrees with the law and wants
state and local governments, may be required to pay to enforce it with customers and employees, they risk
damages to employees who face discrimination. Along violating federal law, alienating a customer base, losing
with possibly reinstating an employee to a lost position employees due to intrusive gender inspections, and
or awarding back pay for lost compensation, as well paying the cost of security staff to police the restrooms.
as paying legal costs and court fees, an employer
See the Appendix for a deeper discussion of local,
may be required to pay compensatory or punitive
state, and federal employment protections.
damages.93 Compensatory damages include costs
16 Ensuring Restroom Privacy for Everyone
GENDER SPECTRUM: When a business/
school/institution decidedly and clearly shows
The May 2016 “Dear Colleague” letter from the
Department of Education and the Department that it recognizes and supports all gender
of Justice encourages schools to make single- identities, what effect does this have on you?
occupancy restrooms and changing rooms available
for any student who seeks additional privacy, as long STUDENT: This makes me feel welcomed and
as the school does not require transgender students
understood. As a teenager, I want to feel the same
to only use those facilities.97
as all of my peers. When a place validates my
This is a best practice for schools, employers, identity it gives me a sense that being transgender
businesses, and public agencies: to provide single-
doesn’t have to be a big thing. It makes me feel
occupancy restrooms and changing rooms for any
individuals who wish more privacy. There are myriad reassured, safer, and more normal.
people who may wish to use a single-occupancy
restroom. Parents with children, nursing mothers, - Transgender Students and School Bathrooms:
caregivers and those for whom they care, people Frequently Asked Questions, Gender Spectrum 99
with certain disabilities or medical needs, people
who prefer to use the restroom or change alone,
transgender and gender non-confirming people policies that prevent the discrimination from reoccurring,
who face harassment in multiple-use restrooms—all before taking legal action to withdraw funds.
these people may benefit from an single-occupancy
restroom or changing room. In its complaint against North Carolina’s bathroom
ban law, the Department of Justice claims that the
See page 23 for recommendations from national University of North Carolina and its board of governors
professional organizations and agencies on how are in violation of Title IX by limiting use of multiple-
to increase bathroom availability, safety, and occupancy bathrooms and changing facilities by
privacy for everyone by making single-occupancy the sex marked on people’s birth certificates.100
restrooms available. According to the complaint, the Department intends
to “secure the [federal financial assistance] recipient’s
compliance through voluntary means.”101 In response
Risk Loss of Federal Education, Health, Jobs, and
to the Department of Justice’s complaint, in May 2016,
Violence Prevention Funding
the University of North Carolina backtracked from its
Educational Funding. Federal education protections previous statement that it would comply with HB2,
under Title IX prohibit school districts from discriminating declaring that it would not enforce North Carolina’s
on the basis of sex, including gender identity, when bathroom ban law.102 It is still unclear whether the State
accessing school facilities including restrooms and of North Carolina will take action against the University
changing rooms.98 Bathroom ban laws do just that— for refusing to follow state law.
discriminate against students on the basis of gender
Healthcare Funding. The federal Affordable Care
identity when they access school facilities.
Act prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex in
Schools that violate Title IX risk a reduction of federal federally–funded health programs and by any health
financial assistance, and may be required to pay monetary provider that accepts Medicaid or Medicare payments
compensation to the student, attorneys’ fees, and from patients. Federal regulations released in May
injunctive relief ordered by a court. The Department of 2016 clarify that “sex” includes gender identity and
Education has worked to protect educational funding for sex stereotypes.103 If a state law requires hospitals or
schools that violate Title IX by focusing first on remedying clinics to force transgender people to use a restroom,
the discrimination and instituting explicit solutions and changing room, or hospital bed inconsistent with their
gender identity, those health care providers could risk If a court finds that North Carolina Department of
millions in federal health care funds. Public Safety and the University of North Carolina are in 17
violation of VAWA, their VAWA funding could be curtailed
Jobs Training Funding. The Workforce Innovation
or cut, reducing vital programs that protect victims of
and Opportunity Act (WIOA) funds state job centers
violence, and costing state taxpayers millions of dollars.
across the country for millions of dollars per state.
WIOA grantees may not discriminate based on sex and Saddle States with Huge Litigation Costs at
noncompliance can result in loss of federal funds.104 Taxpayer Expense
On January 26, 2016, the U.S. Department of Labor
published a proposed regulation interpreting WIOA to Discriminatory bathroom bans open state
prohibit gender identity discrimination, and specifically governments, school districts, and other entities
prohibiting WIOA funding recipients from “denying up to expensive and protracted legislation, often
individuals access to the bathrooms used by the gender on the taxpayers’ dime. For North Carolina alone,
with which they identify.”105 Therefore, bathroom ban the Williams Institute estimates that “the costs and

laws would be in direct contradiction to WIOA and risk burden associated with litigation and administrative
the loss of WIOA funds. enforcement could be significant,” adding that the
over-all cost of the legislation, including loss of
Violence Prevention Funding. The Violence Against federal dollars and business investment, could total a
Women Act (VAWA) provides financial assistance for the staggering $5 billion.109
prevention, investigation, and prosecution of violent
crimes against certain groups of people, particularly As of publication, there are five lawsuits pending
women and LGBT people.106 Grants issued under VAWA in North Carolina regarding the state’s bathroom ban
fund violence prevention programs, victim assistance law, including a lawsuit by the Department of Justice
programs, legal aid, and crisis hotlines, and many other asserting that the law violates Title VII, Title IX, and the
programs and services. The Violence Against Women Violence Against Women Act. This litigation is likely to
Act prohibits discrimination on the basis of sexual cost millions of dollars in legal fees and court costs,
orientation and gender identity in VAWA-funded with litigants including the governor of the state, the
programs and services. VAWA also protects transgender state itself, the state Department of Public Safety, the
people’s right to access restrooms consistent with their University of North Carolina, and the University’s Board
gender identity. of Governors. The Human Rights Campaign found that
Gov. McCrory hired an attorney for this case who had
States receive millions of federal dollars through previously billed North Carolina $360 per hour for
VAWA-funded grants, which are at risk when a state work on a voter ID case in 2014 and 2015.110 This one
violates federal law by permitting or requiring anti- lawyer’s fees alone had cost the state almost $700,000
violence programs to discriminate against LGBT people as of October 2015.111 As public figures, agencies, and
by, for example, by prohibiting a transgender women institutions, these parties will rely on public dollars to
from accessing the services of a women’s shelter, pay for their legal expenses, meaning that taxpayers
a prohibition required by many of the bathroom will bear the cost of defending North Carolina’s
ban bills.107 In its complaint against North Carolina’s bathroom ban law against the federal lawsuit brought
bathroom ban, the Department of Justice notes that by the Department of Justice. North Carolina Governor
the North Carolina Department of Public Safety and Pat McCrory and Republican leaders of North Carolina’s
the University of North Carolina are both recipients General Assembly have also filed their own lawsuits,
of grants through the Violence Against Women Act. at taxpayers’ expense, asking federal courts to rule
Upon receipt of the grant money, both entities signed that the bathroom ban law does not violate Title VII,
contracts assuring they would not discriminate in Title IX or VAWA.112
violation of federal law.108
Create a Hostile Business Climate and
North Carolina’s HB2 Strips Away Local
18
Nondiscrimination Laws
Hurt Jobs & and State Economies
Businesses prefer to operate in states where the laws
Traditionally, in civil and human rights law, federal are clear, where customers feel welcome, and where
laws provide a floor of protection below which businesses can go about their operations without fear
state and local governments may not drop. Many of litigation. Bathroom ban laws create unfavorable
states and cities provide additional protections for business environments because they are vague in terms
their citizens, including those that have protected of enforcement and business responsibility, increase
LGBT people from discrimination by updating their the risk of lawsuits, create unwelcome atmospheres for
existing laws to include sexual orientation and employees and customers, and make it harder to recruit
gender identity. the best and brightest talent. It is unsurprising, then,
that businesses have been pulling out of North Carolina
In late February 2016, the city council of Charlotte,
in the aftermath of its bathroom ban law.

N.C. passed a local nondiscrimination ordinance
that prohibited discrimination in places of public Provisions in many bathroom ban laws require
accommodation, discrimination for city contractors, restroom use to be restricted based on the sex on an
and discrimination in transportation on the basis employee’s or customer’s birth certificate, without
of marital status, familial status, sexual orientation, specifying how an employer or business open to the public
gender identity and gender expression.113 is supposed to ensure that the law is not being violated.
A business could be sued by employees or customers for
North Carolina’s HB2 nullified Charlotte’s not enforcing the state law, but the invasion of privacy
nondiscrimination ordinance as well as other resulting from asking employees and customers to prove
ordinances across the state that protected city their “sex” also exposes businesses to lawsuits. Similarly,
residents against discrimination.114 not following the law opens employers up to a lawsuit
Just as federalism grants states the power from the state, while following the law puts employers at
and flexibility to provide protections for their risk of a federal discrimination lawsuit.
citizens above and beyond those offered by the Next, potential employees and customers alike may
federal government, municipal governments are not want to associate with businesses that discriminate
traditionally free to build stronger local protections against transgender people (even if that discrimination
for their residents.c But what North Carolina has is made mandatory by the state). This is why many
sought to do through HB2, and what additional states businesses in North Carolina have made it clear that they
are proposing, is to preempt local governments from will not be following the new law, making statements
passing broader protections for municipal residents opposing bathroom ban laws in traditional social media,
by restricting the kinds of protections allowed within and in their places of business.118
a state’s borders. Three states explicitly prevent local
county boards and city councils from establishing Other businesses are making the difficult economic
stronger nondiscrimination protections than the decision to take their business elsewhere.119 Most
state has set: Arkansas,115 North Carolina,116 and notably, online payment giant PayPal pulled out of a
Tennessee.117 All three states passed their laws in $3.6 million expansion into Charlotte, North Carolina.120
response to the passage of local nondiscrimination The withdrawal of business investment also means
ordinances within the state. a loss of jobs or a reduction in new jobs. The Williams
Institute estimates that the reduction in corporate
c
For more information about nondiscrimination protections and local and state law, read MAP’s investment cost the state a total of almost 2,000 jobs
LGBT Policy Spotlight: Local Employment Nondiscrimination Ordinances. The report includes so far, which would have brought over $40 million in
an in-depth examination of how Dillon’s Rule and Home Rule interact with local and state
nondiscrimination protections for LGBT people. annual salaries.121 State and municipal governments
across the country have also banned non-essential travel
to North Carolina rather than force their employees to
risk discrimination.122 North Carolina citizens are paying
the price as both jobs and money leave the state.
Can Make It Impossible for Transgender
Two weeks ago, PayPal announced plans to open People to Go About their Daily Lives 19
a new global operations center in Charlotte and Transgender people are part of workplaces and
employ over 400 people in skilled jobs. In the short neighborhoods across our country, and they need to be
time since then, legislation has been abruptly enacted able to use the restroom just like everyone else. Bathroom
by the State of North Carolina that invalidates ban laws are designed to make it extraordinarily difficult,
protections of the rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and even impossible, for transgender people to go about their
lives like other people. These laws not only discriminate
transgender citizens and denies these members of
against transgender people, they also endanger their
our community equal rights under the law. health and contribute to a climate of harassment and
criminalization that puts transgender people at risk of
The new law perpetuates discrimination and it arrest, prosecution, incarceration, and more.

violates the values and principles that are at the
core of PayPal’s mission and culture. As a result, Birth Certificate Requirements Leave Many
Transgender People Unable to Safely Use Public
PayPal will not move forward with our planned
Restrooms
expansion into Charlotte.
Many bathroom ban laws define “biological sex”
This decision reflects PayPal’s deepest values and as the sex found on one’s birth certificate. Transgender
people often struggle to obtain identity documents that
our strong belief that every person has the right
match their lived gender. Many states have requirements
to be treated equally, and with dignity and respect. that make updating documents like birth certificates
These principles of fairness, inclusion and equality difficult or impossible.124 (Some states also limit access
are at the heart of everything we seek to achieve to identity documents for undocumented immigrants,
and stand for as a company. And they compel us putting undocumented immigrants at particular risk.)
Some bathroom ban bills have even defined “biological
to take action to oppose discrimination.
sex” as the sex recorded on a person’s original birth
certificate, meaning that even if a transgender person
- Dan Schulman was able to change the gender marker on their
President and CEO, PayPal, April 5, 2016 123 documents, they would still be barred from using the
restroom that corresponded with their gender identity.
According to the National Transgender Discrimination
Survey, only one-fifth (21%) of transgender people were
able to update all of their identification documents and
records to match the gender they live every day, and one-
third were not able to update any of their documents.125
Only 24% were able to change their birth certificate,
which are often particularly difficult to change. North
Carolina is one of a majority of states that either require
burdensome proof of gender reassignment surgery to
change the gender marker on a birth certificate, or a
court order or both, which means undergoing expensive
medical and/or legal procedures not all transgender
people need or can afford.126 For transgender people
who are unable to update their birth certificates,
bathroom ban laws can make it impossible for them to
safely use the restroom. For example, a transgender man
whose birth certificate lists him as female but who has
lived his adult life as a man would be required to use
20 the women’s restroom, risking violence, harassment,
I am a transgender man, yes, but I am a man. My
and likely causing the women in that restroom to feel
family, my friends, my coworkers and many more
uncomfortable or even call the police—but if he enters
the men’s room, he would risk arrest and prosecution in this state affirm my male identity. Who I am is
based on the bathroom ban law. not something that can be stripped away by this bill.
What has been attacked is a basic right—a right to
feel protected and safe.
I am at McDonald’s [in] Paulsboro NJ, where [the]
manager [] just followed me into the bathroom and I use the men’s room exclusively as I should, yet this
threatened to throw me out. bill could deny me that fundamental right. This bill
opens the door for me to get fired from my job or
I exited the bathroom and am remaining in the store. kicked out of my home simply because of who I
am. The same goes for my lesbian, gay and bisexual
I attempted to show my driver’s license (I am legally community members. It could affect the health and
female.) The manager refused to look at it. well-being of me and many others multiple times a
day in our workplaces and in our daily lives.
I just contacted regional and filed a report. They said
someone would get back to me. As members of the transgender community, we
are no different than anyone else. We exist. You’ve
- @DiracDrynx probably passed us on the street whether you’ve
Transgender woman targeted in restroom, on Twitter 127 known it or not. You may have shared a restroom
with us. We use it, just like you, to pee. In peace. In
privacy. Without fear. Instead of with this anxiety
that has gripped my chest since this legislation was
Figure 6: Transgender People Unable to Update
Identification Documents passed. A basic right such as this should not be the
internal conflict it has become.
One in five transgender people (21%) were able to update
all of their identification documents and records to match
the gender they live as every day... We will continue to exist despite bills like this that
try to diminish our existence in both public and
private places. What we want you to understand
is that we are only looking for our safe spaces
in this world, and our home in North Carolina
should be one of them.
- Joacquin Carcano
... and one-third had not been able to update any
of their documents HIV Project Coordinator, UNC-Chapel Hill 128
Source: Jaime M. Grant et al., “Injustice at Every Turn: A Report of the National Transgender
Discrimination Survey” (Washington: National Center for Transgender Equality and National Gay
and Lesbian Task Force, 2011), http://www.thetaskforce.org/static_html/downloads/reports/
reports/ntds_full.pdf.
Endanger the Health of Transgender and
Figure 7: Avoiding Restrooms Causes Serious Problems
Gender Non-Conforming People 21
31%
When transgender and gender non-conforming of transgender people have
people are denied access to restrooms, they face myriad avoided drinking or eating so
that they did not need to use
health issues, both physical and mental.
the restroom
Physical Health. Multiple health issues result
from having to “hold it,” which is exactly what many
transgender and gender non-conforming people must
often do in order to avoid violence and harassment in
public restrooms. According to GLSEN’s National School
Climate Survey, 35% of LGBT students avoided school
bathrooms because they felt unsafe or uncomfortable.129

According to the Williams Institute’s study of bathroom
use in Washington D.C., 54% of transgender people
surveyed reported experiencing physical problems as a 8% report getting a urinary tract or kidney infection,
result of avoiding public restrooms.130 These problems or other kidney related problems from not being able
included dehydration (from limiting how much they to use the restroom in the last year.
drink to avoid having to use the restroom), urinary tract
Source: Harassment of Transgender People in Bathrooms and Effects of Avoiding Bathrooms:
infections, kidney infections, and other kidney-related Preliminary Findings from the 2015 U.S. Transgender Survey, July 2016, http://www.
issues.131 Nine percent of transgender respondents ustranssurvey.org/preliminary-findings.
to the D.C. survey reported that they avoided getting
necessary medical attention because the medical facility
or doctor’s office had gender-segregated restrooms.132
During my gender transition at a large suburban
Preliminary data released by the National Center for
Transgender Equality found that 31% of transgender Chicago high school, I just wanted to find my own
people have avoided drinking or eating so that they did space. But what I soon discovered was that there
not need to use the restroom, and 8% report getting a was—literally—no space for me.
urinary tract or kidney infection, or other kidney related
problems from not being able to use the restroom in the I recall those days as being filled with unease,
last year (see Figure 7).133
wondering if some school official would call me
Mental Health. For transgender and gender non- by the wrong pronoun or question me too closely.
conforming people, being denied access to restrooms
I was always on guard about things like a name or
can impact mental health. According to the Trans Lifeline,
bathrooms and changing facilities.
a crisis hotline for transgender people, calls to the hotline
almost doubled after the passage of North Carolina’s
bathroom ban law.134 A study further examining data No one at the school made sure I had access to a
from the National Transgender Discrimination Survey facility that matched my appropriate gender. So, I
found a higher prevalence of lifetime suicide attempts dealt with it the only way I could — I went to the
among participants who said they had not been allowed
bathroom before I left home in the morning, drank
to use gender-appropriate bathrooms or other facilities
at school. Because the NTDS did not inquire about little to no liquids during the day and rushed home
when the reported suicide attempts occurred, the study in the afternoon to use the bathroom as soon as I
was not able to determine whether encounters with arrived. I simply held it all day long.
bathroom discrimination at school came before or after
participants’ suicidality.135 Research has also found that
- Nicholas Gladwell
living in a state with discriminatory policies increases
certain negative mental health outcomes for LGB people, Sophomore at Cornell University 137
including anxiety and alcohol use.136
Contribute to the Criminalization of •• Transgender people are often treated with
22 Transgender People disrespect and misgendered by police (lack of an
accurate identity document can put an individual at
Bathroom ban laws represent only one factor in increased risk for this kind of behavior).138
a pattern of broader criminalization of transgender
people. When law enforcement agencies, including •• Transgender people are subjected to invasive and
city and state police, enforce laws and ordinances, unnecessary searches—and, too often, to physical and
they frequently do so in ways that disproportionately sexual violence—at the hands of law enforcement.139
impact transgender people. Transgender people, •• When transgender people seek assistance from
and especially transgender women of color, police, they themselves are often arrested, meaning
frequently experience profiling by police, and are a transgender person who is harassed or attacked
often subjected to invasive searches and treated with because of a bathroom ban law may put themselves
disrespect. at risk if they call the police.140
Bathroom ban laws provide yet another reason Discriminatory laws, now including bathroom bans,
for police to stop, search and interrogate transgender therefore disproportionately impact transgender people,
people. For transgender people, interactions with police especially transgender women of color, and lead to their
are usually negative and frequently dangerous: increased criminalization.141
RECOMMENDATIONS American Restroom Association Guidelines
23
Pass (and Retain) Comprehensive The American Restroom Association (ARA) shares
simple guidelines for gender-neutral restrooms on its
Nondiscrimination Protections for LGBT website, stating that the following people can benefit
People from gender-neutral single-occupancy facilities:
The federal government, states, and municipalities wheelchair users, people who need assistance when
should explicitly prohibit discrimination in employment, using the restroom, people living with medical conditions
housing, healthcare, credit, and places of public that require frequent attention, paruretics (people with
accommodation based on gender identity and shy-bladder or bashful bladder syndrome), parents with
sexual orientation—including discrimination when it young children of the opposite sex, transgender people,
comes to restroom access. Municipalities and states the vision-impaired, and all other users who benefit from
should also oppose legislation that would preempt having an additional option (e.g., when other restrooms
local nondiscrimination protections and limit further are being cleaned, or to minimize long lines, which
protections than at the state level. frequently disproportionately impact women).146
Ensure Access to Restrooms in Building and Plumbing Codes Such as the

Accordance with Gender Identity International Plumbers Code
If not already covered in nondiscrimination laws The International Plumbers Code, adopted by many
or provisions, local and state governments and school states as their own plumbers’ code, requires multiple-
districts should adopt policies explicitly permitting occupancy bathrooms to be designated by sex, but
RECOMMENDATIONS
transgender people to access restrooms and other clarifies that instead, facilities can have two single-
facilities in accordance with their gender identity. occupancy family or assisted-use toilet facilities, which
do not need to be designated by sex.147
Expand Access to Single-Occupancy
Restrooms Occupational Safety and Health Administration
Standards
When a restroom is meant for only one user,
there’s no reason to label it as “male” or “female.” According to the standards set by the Occupational
Some cities are sensibly trying to make restrooms Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) “where toilet
more accessible to everyone by opening existing rooms [used by employees] will be occupied by no more
single-occupancy restrooms (which are often sex- than one person at a time, can be locked from the inside,
segregated) to whomever needs them, benefiting and contain at least one water closet, separate toilet
parents with children, nursing mothers, people with rooms for each sex need not be provided.”148
disabilities and medical issues, elders and caregivers,
Oppose Bathroom Ban Bills
people who prefer more privacy, and transgender
and gender non-conforming people alike. Currently, State and local governments should oppose the
four cities (Austin, Texas; 142 Philadelphia; 143 New passage of bathroom ban bills that restrict transgender
York City; 144 and Washington D.C. 145) require that all people’s use of restrooms and other sex-segregated
single-occupancy restrooms be available for people facilities. As mentioned above, these laws compromise
of any gender to use citywide. safety and privacy and they are impossible to enforce.
The negative consequences of these laws are vast: they
Implement Bathroom Safety and violate federal law and jeopardize federal funding,
Availability Recommendations they are bad for business, and they threaten the
safety, privacy, and health of all people—including
Major professional organizations and federal
transgender people.
agencies offer strong recommendations for how to
increase bathroom safety and availability for everyone.
CONCLUSION
24
While proponents of bathroom ban laws continue
to use ugly rhetoric to support their claims that
nondiscrimination protections threaten safety and
privacy, the facts show otherwise. Nondiscrimination
protections for LGBT people simply help ensure that
LGBT people cannot be unfairly fired, kicked out of
their homes, denied service in places like restaurants,
and denied access to public restrooms. By contrast,
bathroom ban laws do undermine safety and privacy in
restrooms for the public at large, and amplify the risks of
discrimination and violence for transgender and gender
non-conforming people.
Bathroom ban laws also run afoul of federal laws
in ways that leave businesses, schools, and states
vulnerable to expensive litigation and potential loss of
federal funding. The laws are written in vague language
that leaves enforcement unclear and may embolden
citizen vigilantes to take the law into their own hands,
endangering the safety of students and adults alike.
Recent, violence-filled public rhetoric from political
CONCLUSION
leaders and anti-LGBT opponents reinforces this point.

Bathroom ban laws also make it effectively impossible
for many transgender people to use public restrooms,
leading to serious health consequences for transgender
adults and students alike.
In summary, nondiscrimination laws protect LGBT
people from discrimination while still allowing law
enforcement to hold offenders accountable. If anti-
LGBT activists truly wanted to secure safety and privacy
in public restrooms, they would stop advocating for
invasive bathroom ban bills, work to institute the
guidelines of the International Plumbers Code and
the American Restroom Association, and support the
creation of more single-occupancy restrooms that
aren’t sex segregated which could then be used by
anyone who valued privacy, including but not limited
to transgender people.
25
This page intentionally left blank

APPENDIX in places of public accommodation on the bases of
26 race, color, religion, and national origin but does not
Legal Climate: Local, State, and Federal prohibit discrimination on the basis of sex.155 While
Nondiscrimination Protections for LGBT many types of public accommodations are covered by
People federal nondiscrimination laws, there is no federal law
that explicitly and broadly prohibits discrimination on
Federal nondiscrimination protections for LGBT the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity cross
people are a patchwork of statutory interpretations, all public accommodations. Advocates for LGBT equality
federal case law, administrative guidance, and have long pushed for explicit federal legislation that
regulations. would prohibit public accommodations discrimination.156
Employment protections. Employment At the state level, 19 states, and the District of
nondiscrimination laws ensure that employees are not Columbia, and over 200 cities and counties, have laws
unfairly fired from a job or mistreated at work because of prohibiting discrimination based on sexual orientation
their sexual orientation or gender identity. This includes and gender identity in places of public accommodation.157
the ability to use the restroom and changing rooms at
work that coincide with an employee’s gender identity.149 Education protections. Title IX of the Education
Amendments of 1972 protects students against
There is no federal law that explicitly and broadly discrimination on the basis of sex. 158 All schools that
prohibits employment discrimination on the basis of receive federal financial assistance are bound by Title
sexual orientation or gender identity. Title VII of the IX or risk losing their financial assistance. Over the past
Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits discrimination in several years, the Department of Education has clarified
employment on the basis of sex, among other protected on numerous occasions that Title IX’s prohibition on
characteristics.150 Most federal courts to have considered sex discrimination extends to discrimination based on
APPENDIX
the issue, along with the Equal Employment Opportunity gender identity or sex stereotypes.159 Along with the
Commission (EEOC) have clarified that under Title VII’s Department of Justice, the Department of Education
protections on the basis of sex to extend to gender has made it clear on multiple occasions—most recently
identity and transgender status, and to a lesser extent, in a “Dear Colleague” letter in May 2016160—that
sexual orientation. Under these rulings, denying an discrimination includes denying students educational
employee access to a restroom according to their benefits on the basis of their gender identity, such as
gender identity is form of employment discrimination denying them equal access to restrooms and locker
in violation of Title VII.151 However, not all courts rooms consistent with their gender identity.
agree, and EEOC decisions are not binding on most
private employers, so clear and comprehensive federal Federal and state courts have similarly found
nondiscrimination protections are needed to eliminate that discrimination on the basis of gender identity or
confusion for workers and businesses alike. expression in schools constitutes a violation of federal
and state education laws. In April 2016, the federal
Twenty states and the District of Columbia,152 along Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed a dismissal
with over 200 counties and cities nationwide,153 have of a Title IX claim by a transgender student who was
laws explicitly prohibiting employment discrimination banned from using the boys’ restroom by his local school
based on sexual orientation and gender identity and/or board.161 The court recognized that it needed to defer to
expression—the remaining states do not.154 the Department of Education’s interpretation that Title
IX requires a student’s gender identity to be respected,
Public accommodations protections. Public
and that all students must be allowed access to facilities
accommodations nondiscrimination laws protect
that correspond with their gender identity.162
people from facing discrimination in, or being unfairly
refused service or entry to, places accessible to the Twelve states and the District of Columbia prohibit
public, covering anywhere a person is when they are discrimination in schools based on sexual orientation
not at home, work, or school, including retail stores, and gender identity, and one state on the basis of
restaurants, parks, hotels, doctors’ offices, and banks. gender identity alone.163 Thirty-seven states provide no
The Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits discrimination such protections for transgender students.
Housing Protections. There is no federal law that
explicitly and broadly prohibits housing discrimination 27
on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity. The
federal Department of Housing and Urban Development
(HUD) prohibits discrimination on the bases of sexual
orientation and gender identity in HUD-funding housing
programs.164 This includes programs such as Section
8 housing and HUD-funded homeless and domestic
violence shelters. It does not include general private
sector housing.
Twenty states and the District of Columbia, and
dozens of cities and counties, have laws prohibiting
housing discrimination on the bases of sexual orientation
and gender identity.165
For more information about the (un)availability
of nondiscrimination protections across the country,
see our report LGBT Policy Spotlight: Nondiscrimination
Protections for LGBT People.
APPENDIX
ENDNOTES
28
1
The Williams Institute, UCLA School of Law, “Same-Sex Couple and LGBT Demographic Data Interactive,” The Williams Institute, May 2016, http://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/visualization/lgbt-stats.
2
LGBT people are diverse: A survey of adults conducted by Gallup found that 33% of adults who identify as LGBT are people of color. LGBT people are “coming out” at younger and younger ages. The
Williams Institute estimates that there are approximately 3.2 million young people between the ages of 8 and 18 who identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, or queer (LGBTQ). There are
637,000 LGBT-identified documented immigrants living in the U.S., including those with green cards. In addition, there are an estimated 267,000 LGBT-identified undocumented individuals. LGBT
people are more likely to report lower incomes: Only 29% of LGBT adults in the United States report that they are thriving financially, compared to 39% of non-LGBT adults. The gap between LGBT
women and their non-LGBT counterparts is even greater (12 percentage points). According to a 2012 Gallup survey, 20.7% of LGBT people living alone had incomes less than $12,000—near the
poverty line—compared to 17% of non-LGBT people living alone. A study of transgender Americans found they are nearly four times more likely to have a household income under $10,000 per year
than the population as a whole (15% vs. 4%) with much higher rates for transgender people of color. See The Williams Institute, UCLA School of Law, “Same-Sex Couple and LGBT Demographic Data
Interactive;” Ritch C. Savin-Williams, The New Gay Teenager (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2005), http://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php?isbn=9780674022560; Christy Mallory et
al., “Ensuring Access to Mentoring Programs for LGBTQ Youth.” The Williams Institute, January 2014, http://www.nwnetwork.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/TWI-Access-to-Mentoring-Programs.
pdf; Gary J. Gates, “LGBT Adult Immigrants in the United States,” The Williams Institute, March 2013, http://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/wp-content/uploads/LGBTImmigrants-Gates-Mar-2013.
pdf; Gary J. Gates, “LGBT Americans Report Lower Well-Being,” Gallup, August 25, 2014, http://www.gallup.com/poll/175418/lgbt-americans-report-lower.aspx; M. V. Lee Badgett, Laura E. Durso,
and Alyssa Schneebaum, “New Patterns of Poverty in the Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Community,” The Williams Institute, June 2013, http://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/wp-content/uploads/LGB-
Poverty-Update-Jun-2013.pdf; Jaime M. Grant et al., “Injustice at Every Turn: A Report of the National Transgender Discrimination Survey,” National Center for Transgender Equality and National Gay
and Lesbian Task Force, 2011, http://www.thetaskforce.org/static_html/downloads/reports/reports/ntds_full.pdf.
3
Grant et al., “Injustice at Every Turn: A Report of the National Transgender Discrimination Survey.”
4
Samantha Friedman et al., “An Estimate of Housing Discrimination Against Same-Sex Couples,” U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Policy Development and Research, June 1,
2013, http://www.huduser.gov/portal/Publications/pdf/Hsg_Disc_against_SameSexCpls_v3.pdf.
5
M. V. Lee Badgett et al., “Bias in the Workplace: Consistent Evidence of Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity Discrimination,” The Williams Institute, June 2007, http://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/
wp-content/uploads/Badgett-Sears-Lau-Ho-Bias-in-the-Workplace-Jun-2007.pdf.
6
Ibid.
7
Joseph G. Kosciw et al., “The 2013 National School Climate Survey: The Experiences of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Youth in Our Nation’s Schools,” GLSEN, 2014, https://www.glsen.org/sites/
default/files/2013%20National%20School%20Climate%20Survey%20Full%20Report_0.pdf.
8
9
Harassment of Transgender People in Bathrooms and Effects of Avoiding Bathrooms: Preliminary Findings from the 2015 U.S. Transgender Survey, July 2016, http://www.ustranssurvey.org/
preliminary-findings.
10
Brandon Lorenz, “New HRC Poll Shows Overwhelming Support for Federal LGBT Non-Discrimination Bill,” Human Rights Campaign, March 17, 2016, http://www.hrc.org/blog/new-hrc-poll-shows-
overwhelming-support-for-federal-lgbt-non-discrimination.
ENDNOTES
11
Leah Libresco, “Seven Other States Are Considering Restricting Bathrooms for Transgender People,” FiveThirtyEight, April 6, 2016, http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/with-north-carolina-seven-
other-states-are-considering-restricting-bathrooms-for-transgender-people.
12
Houston Equal Rights Ordinance, City of Houston, Texas, Ordinance No. 2014-530 https://www.houstontx.gov/equal_rights_ordinance.pdf.
13
Manny Fernandez and Mitch Smith, “Houston Voters Reject Broad Anti-Discrimination Ordinance,” New York Times, November 3, 2016, http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/04/us/houston-voters-
repeal-anti-bias-measure.html.
14
House Bill 2, General Assembly of North Carolina, Second Extra Session, 2016, http://www.ncleg.net/ /2015E2/Bills/House/PDF/H2v4.pdf.
15
Proposed Ordinance, Code of Ordinances, City of Oxford, Alabama, 2016.
16
Ibid.
17
Sunnivie Brydum, “Oxford, Ala., Repeals Anti-Trans Law,” The Advocate, May 4, 2016, http://www.advocate.com/transgender/2016/5/04/oxford-alabama-repeals-anti-trans-bill.
18
“Justice Department Files Complaint Against the State of North Carolina to Stop Discrimination Against Transgender Individuals,” Department of Justice, Office of Public Affairs, May 9, 2016, https://
www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-files-complaint-against-state-north-carolina-stop-discrimination-against.
19
See, e.g. House Bill 4474, 99th General Assembly, State of Illinois, 2016, http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/99/HB/PDF/09900HB4474lv.pdf; House Bill 1031, Indiana General Assembly, 2016 Session,
2016, http://iga.in.gov/legislative/2016/bills/house/1031#; House Bill 2737, Kansas State Legislature, 2015-2016 Regular Session,, 2016, https://legiscan.com/KS/bill/HB2737/2015.
20
House Bill 2, General Assembly of North Carolina, Second Extra Session 2016.
21
Senate Bill 1306, South Carolina General Assembly 121st Session, 2016, http://www.scstatehouse.gov/billsearch.php?billnumbers=1306&session=121&summary=B.
22
Proposed Ordinance, Rockwall, Texas Municipal Code of Ordinances, accessed June 27, 2016, https://www.scribd.com/doc/310984567/1502-001.
23
House Bill 542, Louisiana State Legislature, 2016 Regular Session, 2016, https://legiscan.com/LA/text/HB542/2016.
24
Proposed Ordinance, Rockwall, Texas Municipal Code of Ordinances.
25
House Bill 364, Kentucky Legislature, 2016 Regular Session, 2016, http://www.lrc.ky.gov/record/16rs/HB364.htm.
26
Indiana House Bill 1031.
27
House Bill 4474, 99th General Assembly, State of Illinois.
28
Senate Bill 1014, 2nd Session of the 55th Legislature, State of Oklahoma, 2016, http://www.oklegislature.gov/BillInfo.aspx?Bill=SB1014&Session=1600.
29
House Bill 2737, Kansas State Legislature, 2015-2016 Regular Session.
30
House Bill 1079, Indiana General Assembly, 2016 Session, http://iga.in.gov/legislative/2016/bills/house/1079; Senate Bill 35, Indiana General Assembly, 2016 Session, http://iga.in.gov/
legislative/2016/bills/senate/35.
31
House Bill 1258, Mississippi Legislature, 2016 Regular Session, http://billstatus.ls.state.ms.us/2016/pdf/history/HB/HB1258.xml.
32
Proposed Ordinance, Code of Ordinances, City of Oxford, Alabama, 2016.
33
House Bill 663, Virginia General Assembly, 2016 Session, http://lis.virginia.gov/cgi-bin/legp604.exe?ses=161&typ=bil&val=hb663&submit=GO; House Bill 781, Virginia General Assembly, 2016
Session, http://lis.virginia.gov/cgi-bin/legp604.exe?ses=161&typ=bil&val=hb781&submit=GO.
34
House Bill 4474, 99th General Assembly, State of Illinois.
35
Senate Bill 1619, 2nd Session of the 55th Legislature, State of Oklahoma, 2016, http://www.oklegislature.gov/BillInfo.aspx?Bill=SB1619.
29
36
House Bill 2414, Tennessee General Assembly, April 19, 2016, http://wapp.capitol.tn.gov/apps/BillInfo/Default.aspx?BillNumber=HB2414.
37
Chap. 0103, An Act to Secure Proper Sanitary Provisions in Factories and Workshops, General Court of Massachusetts, 1887, http://archives.lib.state.ma.us/handle/2452/83308, via Maya Rhodan, “Why
Do We Have Men’s and Women’s Bathrooms Anyway?,” Time, May 16, 2016, http://time.com/4337761/history-sex-segregated-bathrooms.
38
Rhodan, “Why Do We Have Men’s and Women’s Bathrooms Anyway?”
39
Stephanie Pappas, “The Weird History of Gender-Segregated Bathrooms,” Live Science, May 9, 2016, http://www.livescience.com/54692-why-bathrooms-are-gender-segregated.html.
40
Rhodan, “Why Do We Have Men’s and Women’s Bathrooms Anyway?”; T.J. Raphael, “Why a 1920s Legal Move Is Responsible for the Gender-Segregated Bathrooms We Have Today,” The Takeaway,
Public Radio International, May 12, 2016, http://www.pri.org/stories/2016-05-12/why-1920s-legal-move-responsible-gender-segregated-bathrooms-we-have-today.
41
“This Week In Black History,” New Pittsburgh Courier, January 2, 2014, http://newpittsburghcourieronline.com/2014/01/02/this-week-in-black-history-12.
42
Samantha Michaels, “N.C.’s Transgender Skirmish Is Just the Latest in a Long History of Bathroom Freakouts,” Mother Jones, May 11, 2106, http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/05/north-
carolina-transgender-history-bathrooms-freakouts-timeline.
43
Lisa Wade, “Protecting (White) Women in the Bathroom: A History,” Sociological Images, November 10, 2015, https://thesocietypages.org/socimages/2015/11/10/protecting-white-women-in-the-
bathroom-history.
44
Ibid.
45
Michaels, “N.C.’s Transgender Skirmish Is Just the Latest in a Long History of Bathroom Freakouts.”
46
Loretta E. Lynch, “Attorney General Loretta E. Lynch Delivers Remarks at Press Conference Announcing Complaint Against the State of North Carolina to Stop Discrimination Against Transgender
Individuals,” U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Public Affairs, May 9, 2016, https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/attorney-general-loretta-e-lynch-delivers-remarks-press-conference-announcing-
complaint.
47
North Carolina General Statutes, § 14-33, http://www.ncleg.net/EnactedLegislation/Statutes/PDF/BySection/Chapter_14/GS_14-33.pdf.
48
North Carolina General Statutes, § 14-27.20 et seq, http://www.ncleg.net/EnactedLegislation/Statutes/HTML/ByArticle/Chapter_14/Article_7B.html.
49
North Carolina General Statutes, § 14-202, http://www.ncleg.net/EnactedLegislation/Statutes/PDF/BySection/Chapter_14/GS_14-202.pdf. “The term “room” shall include, but is not limited to, a
bedroom, a rest room, a bathroom, a shower, and a dressing room.”
50
Ibid.
51
Movement Advancement Project, “Non-Discrimination Laws,” http://www.lgbtmap.org/equality-maps/non_discrimination_laws.
52
Carlos Maza and Luke Brinker, “15 Experts Debunk Right-Wing Transgender Bathroom Myth,” Media Matters for America, March 20, 2014, http://mediamatters.org/research/2014/03/20/15-experts-
debunk-right-wing-transgender-bathro/198533.
ENDNOTES
53
Ibid.
54
Ibid.
55
56
Indiana, House Bill 1079.
57
Trace William Cowen, “Shocking Footage Shows Police Forcing Lesbian to Leave Women’s Bathroom,” Complex, April 27, 2016, http://www.complex.com/life/2016/04/police-force-lesbian-womens-
bathroom-video.
58
Robert Siegel, “North Carolina Police Say They Can’t Enforce Transgender Bathroom Law,” All Things Considered, National Public Radio, May 10, 2016, http://www.npr.org/2016/05/10/477529266/
north-carolina-police-struggle-to-enforce-transgender-bathroom-law.
59
Ibid.
60
Ibid.
61
Yezmin Villarreal, “N.C. Police Will Not Enforce Anti-LGBT House Bill 2,” The Advocate, May 11, 2016, http://www.advocate.com/transgender/2016/5/11/north-carolina-police-will-not-enforce-anti-
lgbt-house-bill-2.
62
Siegel, “North Carolina Police Say They Can’t Enforce Transgender Bathroom Law.”
63
Corrected Fiscal Note: HB 2414-SB 2387, Tennessee General Assembly Fiscal Review Committee, April 11, 2016, http://www.capitol.tn.gov/Bills/109/Fiscal/HB2414.pdf
64
House Bill 2737, Kansas State Legislature, 2015-2016 Regular Session.
65
Rebecca Rider, “RSS Board: High Schoolers Will Be Allowed to Carry Pepper Spray,” Salisbury Post, May 10, 2016, http://www.salisburypost.com/2016/05/10/board-amends-policies-to-allow-pepper-
spray-shaving-razors-on-campuses.
66
Ibid.
67
Matt DeRienzo, “Woman Mistaken for Transgender Harassed in Walmart Bathroom,” The News-Times, May 16, 2016, http://www.newstimes.com/local/article/Woman-mistaken-for-transgender-
harassed-in-7471666.php.
68
Kosciw et al., “The 2013 National School Climate Survey.”
69
Ibid.
70
Paul Nicholson, “Nashville Firefighter Brennen (Martin) Tatum Calls East Nashville Citizen a ‘Bitch’, Encourages Him to Confront Others | ALSO: NFD Employees on Strip Clubs, Politics, Transgender
Restrooms, & More! *UPDATED*,” East Nashville News, May 23, 2016, http://eastnashville.news/2016/05/nashville-firefighter-brennen-martin-tatum-calls-east-nashville-citizen-a-bitch-
encourages-him-to-confront-others-also-nfd-employees-on-strip-clubs-politics-transgender-restrooms-more.
71
Christian McPhate, “Denton County GOP Sheriff Candidate Tracy Murphree Calls for Violence Against Transgender People Needing to Pee,” Dallas Observer, April 22, 2016, http://www.dallasobserver.
com/news/denton-county-gop-sheriff-candidate-tracy-murphree-calls-for-violence-against-transgender-people-needing-to-pee-8240131.
72
Brian Tashman, “Anti-LGBT Lawyer ‘Taking A Glock .45 To The Ladies Room’ To Defend Against Trans Women,” Right Wing Watch, April 25, 2016, http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/anti-lgbt-
lawyer-taking-glock-45-ladies-room-defend-against-trans-women.
73
Bob Montgomery, “Sheriff Wright Defends Bathroom Bill Comments,” GoUpstate.com, April 13, 2016, http://www.goupstate.com/article/20160413/ARTICLES/160419842.
74
Peter Montgomery, “Boykin’s Defense of ‘Religious Freedom’ Includes Violent Anti-Trans Rhetoric,” Right Wing Watch, March 8, 2016, http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/boykin-s-defense-
religious-freedom-includes-violent-anti-trans-rhetoric.
75
Laura Gunderson, “Dallas City Councilor Micky Garus Threatens Transgender Students,” OregonLive.com, November 11, 2015, http://www.oregonlive.com/pacific-northwest-news/index.ssf/2015/11/
dallas_city_councilor_micky_ga.html.
30 76
Andy Sher, “Bill Affecting Transgender Use of Restrooms and Dressing Rooms Loses Senate Sponsor,” Times Free Press, January 13, 2012, http://www.timesfreepress.com/news/news/story/2012/
jan/13/bill-affecting-transgender-use-restrooms-and-dress/68184.
77
Tanya Eiserer, “Man Follows Woman into Restroom after Mistaking Her for a Man,” WFAA, May 2, 2016, http://www.wfaa.com/news/local/collin-county/man-follows-woman-into-restroom-after-
mistaking-her-for-a-man/160568442.
78
Ibid.
79
DeRienzo, “Woman Mistaken for Transgender Harassed in Walmart Bathroom.”
80
Arturo Garcia, “DC Security Guard Arrested for Blocking Trans Woman from Using Womens’ Restroom,” Raw Story, May 18, 2016, http://www.rawstory.com/2016/05/d-c-security-guard-arrested-for-
blocking-trans-woman-from-using-womens-restroom.
81
Ibid.
82
Jody L. Herman, “Gendered Restrooms and Minority Stress: The Public Regulation of Gender and Its Impact on Transgender People’s Lives,” Journal of Public Management & Social Policy 19, no. 1 (2013):
65–80.
83
Ibid.
84
Harassment of Transgender People in Bathrooms and Effects of Avoiding Bathrooms: Preliminary Findings from the 2015 U.S. Transgender Survey,” July 2016, http://www.ustranssurvey.org/
85
Grant et al., “Injustice at Every Turn.”
86
87
Linda Borg, “Providence School Board approves policy to support transgender students,” Providence Journal, June 28, 2016, http://www.providencejournal.com/news/20160628/providence-school-
board-approves-policy-to-support-transgender-students.
88
Casey O’Dea, “My Turn: State must update nondiscrimination laws,” Concord Monitor, June 11, 2016, http://www.concordmonitor.com/N-H-laws-to-protect-transgender-students-need-
updating-2723860.
89
Section 221.5-231.5, California Education Code, http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=edc&group=00001-01000&file=221.5-231.5; Civil Rights Commission, Rules and Regulations
of the Colorado Civil Rights Commission, Code of Colorado Regulations, vol. 3 CCR 708-1, 2014, https://www.sos.state.co.us/CCR/GenerateRulePdf.do?ruleVersionId=6008&fileName=3%20CCR%20
708-1; Office of Youth Engagement, “Transgender and Gender-Nonconforming Policy Guidance,” District of Columbia Public Schools, June 2015, http://dcps.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/dcps/
publication/attachments/DCPS%20Transgender%20Gender%20Non%20Conforming%20Policy%20Guidance.pdf; J. Silver, John Doe et al. v. Regional School Unit 26 (Maine Supreme Judicial Court
2014); “Providing Safe Spaces for Transgender and Gender Non-Conforming Youth: Guidelines for Gender Identity Non-Discrimination,” Maryland State Department of Education, October 2015, http://
marylandpublicschools.org/MSDE/divisions/studentschoolsvcs/student_services_alt/docs/ProvidingSafeSpacesTransgendergenderNonConformingYouth012016.pdf; “Guidance for Massachusetts
Public Schools Creating a Safe and Supportive School Environment: Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Gender Identity,” Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education, http://www.
doe.mass.edu/ssce/GenderIdentity.pdf; Unlawful Employment Practices, Discrimination, New Jersey Administrative Code, vol. 10:5-12, n.d., http://www.njlaws.com/10_5-12.html?id=2928&a=;
ENDNOTES
Susanne Beauchaine et al., “Prohibiting Discrimination in Washington Public Schools: Guidelines for School Districts to Implement Chapters 28A.640 and 28A.642 RCW and Chapter 392-190 WAC ,”
Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction, Equity and Civil Rights Office, February 2012, http://www.k12.wa.us/Equity/pubdocs/ProhibitingDiscriminationInPublicSchools.pdf; “Guidance to School
Districts for Creating a Safe and Supportive School Environment For Transgender and Gender Nonconforming Students,” New York State Education Department, July 2015, http://www.p12.nysed.gov/
dignityact/documents/Transg_GNCGuidanceFINAL.pdf; “Guidance to School Districts: Creating a Safe and Supportive School Environment for Transgender Students,” Oregon Department of Education,
May 5, 2016, http://media.oregonlive.com/education_impact/other/Transgender%20Student%20Guidance%205-5-16.pdf.
90
Catherine E. Lhamon and Vanita Gupta, “Dear Colleague Letter on Transgender Students,” U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division and U.S. Department of Education, Office for Civil Rights, May 13,
2016, http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/letters/colleague-201605-title-ix-transgender.pdf.
91
Tamara Lusardi v. John M. McHugh, Secretary, Department of the Army (U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 2015).
92
United States of America v. State of North Carolina, et al. (United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina 2016).
93
“Remedies For Employment Discrimination,” U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, n.d., https://www.eeoc.gov/employees/remedies.cfm.
94
Mark Bergen, “Google Ventures Bans Investments in North Carolina Until Anti-LGBT Law is Repealed,” recode, April 1, 2016, http://www.recode.net/2016/4/1/11585792/google-ventures-north-
carolina-hb2-ban.
95
“Remedies For Employment Discrimination,” U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, n.d., https://www.eeoc.gov/employees/remedies.cfm.
96
“Fact Sheet: Bathroom Access Rights for Transgender Employees Under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964,” U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, https://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/
publications/fs-bathroom-access-transgender.cfm.
97
Lhamon and Gupta, “Dear Colleague Letter: Transgender Students.”
98
Catherine Lhamon, Philip Rosenfelt, and Jocelyn Samuels, “Dear Colleague Letter,” U.S. Department of Justice and U.S. Department of Education, May 8, 2014, https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/
files/crt/legacy/2014/05/08/plylerletter.pdf.
99
“Transgender Students and School Bathrooms: Frequently Asked Questions,” Gender Spectrum, https://www.genderspectrum.org/bathroomfaq.
100
“Justice Department Files Complaint Against the State of North Carolina to Stop Discrimination Against Transgender Individuals.”
101
Ibid.
102
Zack Ford, “University of North Carolina Reverses on Complying with HB2,” Think Progress, May 30, 2016, http://thinkprogress.org/lgbt/2016/05/30/3783114/unc-hb2.
103
Nondiscrimination in Health Programs and Activities, A Rule by the Health and Human Services Department, May 15, 2016, https://www.federalregister.gov/articles/2016/05/18/2016-11458/
nondiscrimination-in-health-programs-and-activities.
104
Nondiscrimination, United States Code, vol. 29 U.S.C. § 3248, 2014, https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/USCODE-2014-title29/html/USCODE-2014-title29-chap32-subchapI-partE-sec3248.htm.
105
Implementation of the Nondiscrimination and Equal Opportunity Provisions of the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act, 81 Fed. Reg. 4494, 4550, 2016, https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2016-
01-26/html/2016-01213.htm.
106
The Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act of 2013, P.L. 113-4, Mar. 7, 2013.
107
“Frequently Asked Questions: Nondiscrimination Grant Condition in the Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act of 2013,” U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office for Civil
Rights, April 9, 2014, https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/ovw/legacy/2014/06/20/faqs-ngc-vawa.pdf.
108
“Justice Department Files Complaint Against the State of North Carolina to Stop Discrimination Against Transgender Individuals.”
109
Christy Mallory and Brad Sears, “Discrimination, Diversity, and Development: The Legal and Economic Implications of North Carolina’s HB2,” The Williams Institute and Out Leadership, May 2016,
http://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/wp-content/uploads/Discrimination-Diversity-and-Development_The-Legal-and-Economic-Implications-of-North-Carolinas-HB2.pdf.
110
Brandon Lorenz, “How Much Will Pat McCrory’s Indefensible HB2 Lawsuit Cost Taxpayers?,” Human Rights Campaign, May 10, 2016, https://www.hrc.org/blog/how-much-will-pat-mccrorys-
indefensible-hb2-lawsuit-cost-taxpayers.
31
111
Ibid.
112
“North Carolina’s Lawsuit Against the Justice Department,” The New York Times, May 9, 2016, http://nyti.ms/23D4qeb; Mark Binker and Laura Leslie, “McCrory, Lawmakers Want Courts to Declare HB2
Doesn’t Discriminate,” WRAL.com, May 9, 2016, http://www.wral.com/mccrory-asks-court-to-declare-hb2-doesn-t-discriminate/15693375.
113
Ordinance Number 7056, Charlotte Ordinance Book 59, page 743 , 2016, http://charmeck.org/city/charlotte/CityClerk/Ordinances/February%2022,%202016.pdf.
114
Michael Gordon, Mark S. Price, and Katie Peralta, “Understanding HB2: North Carolina’s Newest Law Solidifies State’s Role in Defining Discrimination,” The Charlotte Observer, March 26, 2016, http://
www.charlotteobserver.com/news/politics-government/article68401147.html.
115
Senate Bill 202, 90th General Assembly, State of Arkansas, 2015, http://www.arkleg.state.ar.us/assembly/2015/2015R/Bills/SB202.pdf.
116
North Carolina G.S. § 130A-118.
117
Senate Bill 632, Tennesee General Assembly, 2011, https://votesmart.org/static/billtext/35161.pdf.
118
Emily Shugerman, “These Business Owners Will Restore Your Faith in North Carolina — and Possibly Humanity,” Revelist, March 29, 2016, http://www.revelist.com/us-news/north-carolina-trans-
friendly-businesses/1240.
119
Zack Ford, “North Carolina Starts To Face Real Economic Consequences For Anti-LGBT Law (Updated),” ThinkProgress, April 1, 2016, http://thinkprogress.org/lgbt/2016/04/01/3765676/north-carolina-
economic-consequences.
120
Dan Schulman, “PayPal Withdraws Plan for Charlotte Expansion,” Paypal Stories, April 5, 2016, https://www.paypal.com/stories/us/paypal-withdraws-plan-for-charlotte-expansion.
121
Mallory and Sears, “Discrimination, Diversity, and Development: The Legal and Economic Implications of North Carolina’s HB2.”
122
Elise Foley, “90 Big-Name Business Leaders Just Took A Stand Against North Carolina’s Anti-LGBT Law,” The Huffington Post, March 29, 2016, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/ceos-north-
carolina-lgbt-law_us_56faeb83e4b0a06d5803e81d.
123
Schulman, “PayPal Withdraws Plan for Charlotte Expansion.”
124
Movement Advancement Project, “Identity Document Laws and Policies.”
125
126
127
@DiracDrynx, Twitter post, May 25, 2016, 1:21 PM, https://twitter.com/DiracDrynx/status/735566581703512065.
128
Joaquin Carcano, “North Carolina Is Attacking My Basic Rights as a Transgender Man,” Time, March 30, 2016, http://time.com/4276396/north-carolina-transgender-rights.
129
130
Herman, “Gendered Restrooms and Minority Stress.”
ENDNOTES
131
Ibid.
132
Ibid.
133
Harassment of Transgender People in Bathrooms and Effects of Avoiding Bathrooms: Preliminary Findings from the 2015 U.S. Transgender Survey,” July 2016, http://www.ustranssurvey.org/
134
Samantha Allen, “After North Carolina’s Law, Trans Suicide Hotline Calls Double,” The Daily Beast, April 19, 2016, http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/04/20/after-north-carolina-s-law-
trans-suicide-hotline-calls-double.html.
135
Kristie L. Seelman, “Transgender Adults’ Access to College Bathrooms and Housing and the Relationship to Suicidality,” Journal of Homosexuality, February 25, 2016, 1–22, doi:10.1080/00918369.2
016.1157998.
136
Mark L. Hatzenbuehler et al., “The Impact of Institutional Discrimination on Psychiatric Disorders in Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Populations: A Prospective Study,” American Journal of Public Health
100, no. 3 (2010): 452–459.
137
Nicholas Caldwell, “Commentary: No Student Should Have to Suffer like This,” Chicago Tribune, November 4, 2015, http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/commentary/ct-perspec-
transgender-palatine-locker-room-civil-rights-1104-20151104-story.html.
138
Amnesty International, “United States of America: Stonewalled: Police Abuse and Misconduct against Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and People in the U.S.,” September 2005, https://www.amnesty.org/en/
documents/AMR51/122/2005/en.
139
Nahal Zamani et al., “Stop and Frisk: The Human Impact,” Center for Constitutional Rights, July 2012, http://stopandfrisk.org/the-human-impact-report.pdf.
140
Osman Ahmed and Chai Jindasurat, “2014 Report on Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer, and HIV-Affected Hate Violence,” National Coalition of Anti-Violence Programs, 2015, http:// www.avp.
org/resources/avp-resources/405-2014-report-on-lesbian-gay-bisexual-transgender-queer-and-hiv-affected-hate-violence.
141
“Unjust: How the Broken Criminal Justice System Fails Transgender People,” Movement Advancement Project, http://lgbtmap.org/policy-and-issue-analysis/criminal-justice.
142
Gender Neutral Signage for Single-User Restrooms, Austin, Texas Code of Ordinances, § 4-16-1, 2014, https://www2.municode.com/library/tx/austin/codes/code_of_
ordinances?nodeId=TIT4BUREPERE_CH4-16COFA_ART1GEUTSISIERRE_S4-16-1DE.
143
Gender-Neutral Bathroom Designation, Pennsylvania Code, § 9-636, 2015, https://phila.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=2456381&GUID=D4CF5519-30FB-4FA7-A12F-44F6F35FB67F.
144
“Legal Enforcement Guidance on the Discrimination on the Basis of Gender Identity or Expression: Local Law No. 3 (2002); N.Y.C. Admin. Code § 8-102(23),” NYC Commision on Human Rights, December
21, 2015, http://www.nyc.gov/html/cchr/downloads/pdf/publications/GenderID_InterpretiveGuide_2015.pdf.
145
“Safe Bathrooms DC,” District of Columbia Office of Human Rights, http://ohr.dc.gov/page/safe-bathrooms-dc.
146
“UNISEX & FAMILY RESTROOMS,” American Restroom Association, http://www.americanrestroom.org/family.
147
International Code Council, “Chapter 4: Fixtures, Faucets, and Fixture Fittings,” 2015 International Plumbing Code, http://codes.iccsafe.org/app/book/content/2015-I-Codes/2015%20IPC%20HTML/
Chapter%204.html.
148
U.S. Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, “Sanitation. - 1910.141” https://www.osha.gov/pls/oshaweb/owadisp.show_document?p_table=STANDARDS&p_
id=9790.
149
Tamara Lusardi v. John M. McHugh, Secretary, Department of the Army (U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 2015).
150
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 , P.L. 88-352, 1964.
151
U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, “What You Should Know About EEOC and the Enforcement Protections for LGBT Workers”; Tamara Lusardi v. John M. McHugh, Secretary, Department of
the Army, U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, 2015.
152
Movement Advancement Project, “Non-Discrimination Laws: Employment,” http://lgbtmap.org/equality-maps/non_discrimination_laws.
32
153
Movement Advancement Project, “Local Employment Non-Discrimination Ordinances,” http://lgbtmap.org/equality-maps/non_discrimination_ordinances.
154
Movement Advancement Project, “Housing Discrimination Laws and Policies,” http://www.lgbtmap.org/equality-maps/non_discrimination_laws/housing.
155
Title II of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, P.L. 88-352, 1964.
156
Dacvid Cicilline, Equality Act, United States Code, 2015, https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/3185.
157
Movement Advancement Project, “Non-Discrimination Laws: Public Accommodations,” http://lgbtmap.org/equality-maps/non_discrimination_laws.
158
Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, P.L. 92-318, 1972.
159
Catherine E. Lhamon, “Questions and Answers on Title IX and Sexual Violence,” U.S. Department of Education, Office for Civil Rights, April 29, 2014, http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/
qa-201404-title-ix.pdf.
160
Lhamon and Gupta, “Dear Colleague Letter: Transgender Students.”
161
Grimm v. Gloucester County School Board (U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit 2016).
162
Ibid.
163
Movement Advancement Project, “Safe Schools Laws,” http://www.lgbtmap.org/equality-maps/safe_school_laws.
164
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, “Equal Access to Housing in HUD Programs Regardless of Sexual Orientation or Gender Identity,” Federal Register 77, no. 23 (February 3, 2012),
http://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/documents/huddoc?id=12lgbtfinalrule.pdf.
165
Movement Advancement Project, “Housing Discrimination Laws and Policies,” http://www.lgbtmap.org/equality-maps/non_discrimination_laws/housing.
ENDNOTES
33
MAP thanks the following major* funders, without

whom this report would not have been possible.
Craig Benson
David Bohnett Foundation
David Dechman & Michel Mercure
David Geffen Foundation
Evelyn and Walter Haas Jr. Fund
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Ford Foundation
Gill Foundation
Esmond Harmsworth
Jim Hormel
Johnson Family Foundation
Jeff Lewy & Ed Eishen
Amy Mandel & Katina Rodis
Weston Milliken
The Palette Fund
Matthew Patsky
Mona Pittenger
H. van Ameringen Foundation
Wild Geese Foundation
*Individual and institutional funders greater than $5,000

2215 Market Street • Denver, CO 80205
1-844-MAP-8800
www.lgbtmap.org
Copyright © 2016, Movement Advancement Project

Bathroom Ban Laws

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Bathroom Ban Laws

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Bathroom Ban Laws

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

THE FACTS: BATHROOM SAFETY, NONDISCRIMINATION

LAWS, AND BATHROOM BAN LAWS

National Center for

Movement Advancement Project

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY INFOGRAPHIC.............................................................................................i

NONDISCRIMINATION LAWS DON’T COMPROMISE SAFETY—BATHROOM BAN LAWS DO......8

BATHROOM BAN LAWS HAVE OTHER SERIOUS NEGATIVE CONSEQUENCES.............................15

LAWS, AND BATHROOM BAN LAWS

NONDISCRIMINATION LAWS DON’T COMPROMISE

EXISTING CRIMINAL LAWS NONDISCRIMINATION LAWS BATHROOM BAN LAWS

BATHROOM BAN LAWS HAVE OTHER SERIOUS

VIOLATE NUMEROUS CREATE A HOSTILE BUSINESS MAKE IT IMPOSSIBLE FOR

is already illegal, and is punishable by a fine or jail time;

By contrast, laws like North Carolina’s HB2, called

•• Between 13% and 47% of transgender workers

report being physically attacked or assaulted in

NV NE IA PA CT State prohibits discrimination in employment,

Source: Movement Advancement Project, “Nondiscrimination Laws,” http://lgbtmap.org/equality-maps/non_discrimination_laws.

EXISTING CRIMINAL LAWS

BATHROOM BAN LAWS

DO COMPROMISE CAN’T BE ENFORCED WITHOUT SERIOUS

BATHROOM BAN LAWS HAVE OTHER SERIOUS NEGATIVE CONSEQUENCES, TOO.

access to restrooms. contacted law enforcement officials in 12 of the states

NONDISCRIMINATION LAWS DON’T COMPROMISE SAFETY—BATHROOM BAN LAWS DO

restroom increases because of state or local legislation, - Christina Hallingse

NONDISCRIMINATION LAWS DON’T COMPROMISE SAFETY—BATHROOM BAN LAWS DO

provide unchecked power to law enforcement officers

NONDISCRIMINATION LAWS DON’T COMPROMISE SAFETY—BATHROOM BAN LAWS DO

VIOLATE PRIVACY AND COMPROMISE SAFETY

VIOLATE FEDERAL LAW ON MANY LEVELS

Risk Loss of Federal

CREATE HOSTILE BUSINESS CLIMATE AND HURT

MAKE IT IMPOSSIBLE FOR TRANSGENDER

CONSEQUENCES that come through as I am not comfortable

BATHROOM BAN LAWS HAVE OTHER SERIOUS NEGATIVE CONSEQUENCES

BATHROOM BAN LAWS HAVE OTHER SERIOUS NEGATIVE CONSEQUENCES

in the aftermath of its bathroom ban law.

BATHROOM BAN LAWS HAVE OTHER SERIOUS NEGATIVE CONSEQUENCES

BATHROOM BAN LAWS HAVE OTHER SERIOUS NEGATIVE CONSEQUENCES

Ensure Access to Restrooms in Building and Plumbing Codes Such as the

leaders and anti-LGBT opponents reinforces this point.

This page intentionally left blank

MAP thanks the following major* funders, without

*Individual and institutional funders greater than $5,000

Copyright © 2016, Movement Advancement Project

You might also like