California's transgender-student law: Kids can choose bathrooms, sports teams

Under California's new law, any child from kindergarten through 12th grade can decide which gender identity they prefer and use the sports teams and bathrooms that correspond.

AP/File
California Gov. Jerry Brown, seen here in February 2011, has signed into law a bill that extends to all California K-12 students gender identity rights that have so far only guaranteed in San Francisco and Los Angeles public schools.

California on Monday became the first state to enshrine certain rights for transgender students in state law, requiring public schools to allow those students access to whichever restroom and locker room they want.

Democratic Gov. Jerry Brown announced that he had signed AB1266, which also will allow transgender kindergarten-through-12th grade students to choose whether they want to play boys' or girls' sports. The new law gives students the right "to participate in sex-segregated programs, activities and facilities" based on their self-perception and regardless of their birth gender.

Supporters said it will help reduce bullying and discrimination against transgender students. It comes as the families of transgender students have been waging local battles with school districts across the country over what restrooms and locker rooms their children can use, disagreements that have sometimes landed in court.

The National Center for Lesbian Rights and the ACLU of California were among the bill's supporters. Detractors, including some Republican lawmakers, said allowing students of one gender to use facilities intended for the other could invade the other students' privacy.

Such fears are overblown, said Carlos Alcala, spokesman for the bill's author, Democratic Assemblyman Tom Ammiano of San Francisco. In general, he said, transgender students are trying to blend in and are not trying to call attention to themselves.

"They're not interested in going into bathrooms and flaunting their physiology," Alcala said.

He also noted that the state's largest school district, Los Angeles Unified, has had such a policy for nearly a decade and reported no problems. San Francisco schools also have had a policy similar to the new law, and numerous other districts signed on in support of the legislation.

"Clearly, there are some parents who are not going to like it," Alcala said. "We are hopeful school districts will work with them so no students are put in an uncomfortable position."

Brown signed the bill without comment. Democratic Assembly Speaker John Perez said the law "puts California at the forefront of leadership on transgender rights."

The Gay-Straight Alliance Network said two states, Massachusetts and Connecticut, have statewide policies granting the same protections, but California is the first to put them into statute and require them in all school districts.

The governor's action was criticized by a Sacramento-based conservative organization, which said previous state law was sufficient to address the concerns of transgender students and their families. Before Brown signed AB1266, state law already prohibited schools from discriminating against students based on their gender identity.

Karen England, executive director of Capitol Resource Institute, criticized the Legislature and governor for spreading "San Francisco values" throughout the state.

"The answer is not to force something this radical on every single grade in California," she said.

She said the new law does not require students to prove they have a gender-identity issue, but rather requires school administrators to rely on students' opinions of themselves. England also noted that there is no accurate way to gauge the effect of such policies because no uniform data on student or parent complaints is being collected.

She predicted school districts will face lawsuits from parents of other children who feel their rights have been violated by the new law.

Hours after the governor's signing was announced, the Pacific Justice Institute, a conservative legal group based in Sacramento, issued a news release soliciting plaintiffs for a future lawsuit against the law, which will take effect Jan. 1.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.