CHARLESTON — A bill touted by some last week as a “Women’s Bill of Rights” that would limit access to certain spaces by transgender women is on the move, along with another bill that would prohibit “non-binary” as a category on birth certificates.
The House Judiciary Committee met Monday afternoon to review several bills, including House Bill 5243, relating to the Women’s Bill of Rights.
HB 5243 would put in place stronger definitions in State Code for sex-based terms, such as stating that “woman,” “girl,” and “mother” refer to biological females except in cases of developmental and genetic anomalies or accidents.
The bill states that a person’s biological sex is set at birth and does not include gender identity or other terms for sex the bill identifies as subjective. Any reference to “gender” in State Code would be changed to “sex” under the new definitions.
The bill goes on to prohibit unfair treatment of females and males in certain situations, including the providing of separate single-sex living facilities, locker rooms, bathrooms, domestic violence shelters, and rape crisis centers based on biological sex.
The bill states that “equal” does not mean “same” or “identical,” but Democratic members of the committee were confused about what rights were being protected.
“I’m trying to figure out what exactly what rights we are providing because we have this fantastic title, the West Virginia Women’s Bill of Rights Act,” said House Minority Whip Shawn Fluharty, D-Ohio. “Who wouldn’t want to vote for that? But I mean, what actual rights are we guaranteeing here?
“I’m still perplexed on what exactly what rights are now being provided that aren’t currently being provided under the law,” Fluharty continued after asking several questions of the committee’s counsel presenting the committee substitute for HB 5243.
Questions arose over whether the bill’s new definitions for sex would affect the state’s Human Rights Act, which prohibits housing and employment discrimination based on race, religion, color, national origin, ancestry, sex, age, blindness or disability. Concerns were also raised about language which appears to allow for open-ended data collection on public school students, or how the bill would affect individuals born with Differences of Sex Development, conditions whereby an individual can be born with both male and female genitalia.
“There are individuals who are born that their reproductive systems can produce sperm and their reproductive systems can produce ova,” said House Judiciary Committee Minority Chairman Joey Garcia, D-Marion. “If that were the case and they produce both and they don’t fit into both categories, they fit into neither I guess.”
“My understanding is intersex people may have different genitalia,” added Del. Evan Hansen, D-Monongalia. “I’m sorry to keep bringing that word up, but I don’t set the agenda here. So, something may be different in their pants, but it has nothing to do with accessibility to getting into a building or accessing services or anything like that. It’s something that nobody could even see.”
An amendment was offered by Garcia to incorporate the provisions of House Bill 4272, which would create the Katherine Johnson and Dorothy Vaughan Fair Pay Act. The bill, which has long been a goal of the House Democratic caucus but never taken up by a committee, would provide job applicants with access to a range of wages, benefits, and compensation for the position the applicant is applying for. The amendment was ruled not germane to the bill.
“If we’re going to talk about a women’s bill of rights, then we should talk about fair pay for women,” Garcia said. “We’ve not been able to get this bill on a committee agenda. We’ve not been able to get this bill on the floor. This is the perfect time to vote on it.”
Another failed amendment by Hansen would exempt the state Human Rights Act from the provisions of HB 5243.
“It’s the bedrock part of West Virginia State Code,” Hansen said. “My concern is the bill as written absolutely would apply to the Human Rights Act. This would apply to every article of State Code, but it might impact (the Human Rights Act) in unforeseen ways.”
Last week, HB 4253 and a companion bill in the state Senate was rolled out, with Gov. Jim Justice and lawmakers appearing with representatives of the Independent Women’s Forum, the Independent Women’s Law Center, and the Women’s Liberation Front – groups that self-identify as feminist but have worked hand-in-hand with conservative groups on anti-transgender issues. The bill is opposed by the ACLU-WV, LGBTQ advocacy organization Fairness West Virginia, and reproductive rights group WV Free.
The House Judiciary Committee also recommended House Bill 4233 Monday, prohibiting the use of “non-binary” on West Virginia birth certificates.
Steven Allen Adams can be reached at sadams@newsandsentinel.com
