Categories
News News Blog News Feature

Judge Allows TN Trans Bathroom Law to Stand

A federal judge has dismissed a legal challenge to Tennessee’s so-called “bathroom law,” leaving in place rules that require public schools to bar transgender students from the gendered bathrooms and locker rooms of their choice.

The decision by U.S. District Judge William Campbell keeps in effect the “Tennessee Accommodations for All Children Act,” signed into law by Gov. Bill Lee in 2021.

The law requires schools to offer “reasonable accommodation” to transgender students and school staff, but specifically excludes access to a multi-use restrooms or changing facilities.

It says students and staff must make formal requests for accommodation, such as to use a standalone restroom, and a principal must approve or deny the request in writing. And it gives parents and teachers the right to sue a school district for monetary damages if transgender students use a restroom or locker room that doesn’t conform with their gender at birth.

Critics have said the law discriminates against transgender kids and school employees, and forces individuals to out themselves to their peers.

The Human Rights Campaign, an LGBTQ advocacy organization that served as legal counsel in the lawsuit, has not announced whether it plans to appeal the ruling, a spokesperson said Thursday.

Judge refuses to dismiss all claims by transgender child against state, Williamson County Schools

Eli Givens, a college sophomore and LGBTQ advocate with the Tennessee Equality Project, who is unconnected to the case, called the ruling “heart wrenching” and “terrifying” for trans kids and their parents.

“I had to miss out on classes frequently because I had to go to a bathroom on the other side of school,” said Givens, who came out as trans at age 11. “What do you do in a bathroom? You go in, use the restroom, wash your hands, and you leave.”

Parents of a third grade transgender student in Williamson County Schools first filed the legal challenge in 2022, arguing the law violated the equal protection clause of the U.S. Constitution and Title IX, which prohibits sex-based discrimination in federally funded programs.

Their child, who had been living as a girl since age six, was denied access to multi-occupancy restrooms and directed to a separate and unsanitary standalone restroom at a distance from her classroom.

The insistence that she use a separate restroom “isolates her and distinguishes her from her classmates and exacerbates the stress and anxiety she experiences while trying to fit in and avoid being stigmatized on the basis of her sex and gender identity,” the lawsuit said.

Campbell had previously shot down efforts by attorneys for Williamson County Schools and state education department to dismiss the lawsuit.

In his subsequent decision, issued September 4th, Campbell noted the legal landscape that has shifted since then.

The 6th Circuit Court of Appeals, in separate decisions, has upheld two Tennessee laws aimed at transgender children and adults, including the state’s ban on gender-affirming care for minors, he noted. The appeals court concluded gender identity is not recognized as a protected class. Under that standard set by the appeals court, Campbell said the lawsuit required a different analysis.

“Although Plaintiff identifies as a girl, the act prohibits her from using the facilities that correspond to her gender identity, while students who identify with their biological sex at birth are permitted to use such facilities,” Campbell wrote.

“However, the act and policy do not prefer one sex over the other, bestow benefits or burdens based on sex, or apply one rule for males and another for females,” the decision said.

Federal education officials have separately taken the position that Title IX protects transgender students access to facilities that conform with their gender identity.

In a separate and ongoing legal fight, Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti is leading a multi-state lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Education over its position.

Tennessee Lookout is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Tennessee Lookout maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Holly McCall for questions: info@tennesseelookout.com. Follow Tennessee Lookout on Facebook and X.

Categories
News News Blog News Feature

‘Anti-Trans’ Bathroom Bill Moved To Summer Study

Proposed legislation dubbed the “anti-trans bathroom bill” has been deferred to summer study following a discussion in a Senate panel in the General Assembly.

Lawmakers opted to conduct further research and “tighten up” on SB 2781 before further voting during a Senate Judiciary Committee meeting today.

The bill, introduced by Senator Janice Bowling (R-Tullahoma), “makes it a criminal offense for a person to knowingly enter into and remain in a public restroom that does not correspond with the person’s biological sex.” 

The amended summary of the bill reads: “Expands the offense of observation without consent to include a person who knowingly enters into and remains in a public restroom that does not correspond with the person’s biological sex.”

The bill would also expand the offense to include “a person that adopts rules or enforces a policy or other work-related guidance for employees or contractors to promote or assist in the commission of observation without consent involving a person who knowingly enters into and remains in a public restroom that does not correspond with the person’s biological sex, in a place where there is a reasonable expectation of privacy, including, but not limited to, a restroom, locker room, dressing room, or shower, designated for multi-person, single-sex use.”

During the meeting, Bowling spoke about this amendment that makes the bill which expands present laws prohibiting citizens from “knowingly spy[ing on] or view[ing]” others “in a place where there is a reasonable expectation of privacy,” if the viewing “would offend or embarrass an ordinary person if the person knew the person was being viewed,” and “was for the purpose of sexual arousal or gratification of the defendant.”

Bowling said, “There’s been a lot of raging debate over the last few years around locker rooms and bathroom access for transgender individuals. This bill prohibits public institutions, which have bathrooms open to the public, from adopting rules which force employees to violate Peeping Tom laws.”

She added when establishments give people the option to use the bathroom they “want to rather than the bathroom that is there according to your biological function,” it gives them the opportunity to “violate and observe people of the opposite sex.”

Senator Paul Rose (R-Covington) said the bathrooms on the Capitol floor are single-use and sometimes lawmakers have to use other bathrooms out of necessity. 

When asked how this bill would apply to situations like this, Bowling responded “that person will do their business and get out of there quickly.”

“This is for if you are there and there is a person of the opposite sex and you do gaze on them — look on them — in a way that would make them feel violated,” said Bowling.

Elizabeth Insogna, committee attorney, mentioned that as the amendment is currently drafted, a criminal offense would still apply even if the bathroom was not occupied by another person.

“As the bill is drafted right now, if you knowingly entered or remained in the restroom that didn’t correspond with the person’s biological sex, that would be an offense,” said Insogna.

Senator Kerry Robert (R-Springfield) recommended that the wording and language used in the amendment be “tightened up” as the definition of “remain” had not been clearly defined in the context of the bill. 

A motion was made by Senator Jon Lundberg (R-Bristol) to move the bill to summer study, as he mentioned that he had heard from the business community about “concerns” they have regarding the bill, and that he didn’t want to rush something “of this magnitude that could have an negative impact.”

Bowling said that if clarification was needed, she is “glad” for the bill to go to summer study, as it is “timely.”

“I’ve heard from many parents in schools in particular where the boys go in and there’s a girl sitting on the urinal, where the boys go into the girls bathroom, and it’s getting out of hand. We need to stop what’s happening for the sake of privacy and health,” Bowling said.

Categories
Memphis Gaydar News

Tennessee Sued Over Anti-Transgender Bathroom Law

An LGBTQ advocacy group filed a federal lawsuit against Tennessee earlier this week, challenging a bathroom bill that restricts transgender students’ use of school restrooms. 

The Human Rights Campaign (HRC) filed the lawsuit in the District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee on behalf of two transgender children. 

The lawsuit alleges that the Tennessee Accommodations for All Children Act (also known as the School Facilities Law), signed by Governor Bill Lee in May, “unfaily discriminates against transgender children.”

“By singling out transgender students for disfavored treatment and explicitly writing discrimination against transgender people into State law, the School Facilities Law violates the most basic guarantees of equal protection under the U.S. Constitution and Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972,” the lawsuit reads. 

The lawsuit further argues that the law endangers the safety, privacy, security, and well-being of transgender students through “intentional and inherent discrimination.” 

“The law invites potential harassment and assault of non-transgender students who may not fit gender expectations or stereotypes associated with their gender identity by giving private persons a right of action to sue under the Law, and thereby encouraging independent policing of everyone who uses a multi-occupancy restroom,” the lawsuit reads. 

The lawsuit seeks to block the state from enforcing the law, while requiring that the plaintiffs, along with other students, are allowed to use multi-occupancy restrooms matching their gender identity. 

HRC president Alphonso David calls the law in question “morally reprehensible” and “devoid of any sound legal justification.” 

“Courts have time-and-time again ruled against these dangerous and discriminatory laws and we are going to fight in court to strike down this one and protect the civil rights of transgender and non-binary young people,” David said in a press release. “With our representation of two transgender kids today, we are sending a strong message of support for all transgender and non-binary children across the country [that] you matter, and your legal rights should be respected.” 

The law being challenged is one of five targeting transgender students signed into law this year in Tennessee. Together, the laws prevent transgender students from participating in high school and middle school sports, prevent physicians from prescribing hormone treatment for prepubertal transgender youth, require public schools to notify parents before offering any curriculum about sexual orientation and gender identity, and require businesses with bathrooms open to the public to post a notice at the entrance of each public restroom if the business allows transgender individuals to use the restrooms corresponding with their gender identity. 

This is the second lawsuit filed in response to one of these laws. The first, filed in May by the American Civil Liberties Union, challenges the Business Bathroom Bill, which requires businesses to post signs if they allow transgender customers to use multi-occupancy restrooms. A federal judge has preliminarily blocked the law from being implemented. 

Categories
News News Blog

Judge Issues Injunction Against Anti-Trans Bathroom Law

A federal judge blocked a new Tennessee law that would require business owners who allow transgender people to use the public bathroom that matches their gender to post a warning sign. 

The lawsuit asserts that the law violates the First Amendment and requests that the judge issue a preliminary injunction to prevent the law from being enforced while the lawsuit proceeds.

The seemingly short-lived law, which passed in April and went into effect on July 1st, requires that any “public or private entity or business that operates a building or facility open to the general public and that, as a matter of formal or informal policy, allows a member of either biological sex to use any public restroom within the building or facility shall post notice of the policy at the entrance of each public restroom in the building or facility.”

On June 25th, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Tennessee and the ACLU filed a lawsuit against the bill on behalf of Tennessee business owners Kyle Sayers, owner of Sactuary in Chattanooga, and Bob Bernstein, owner of Fido in Nashville. 

The injunction was issued, with the decision reading, “The plaintiffs are likely to succeed on the merits; if they are not granted a preliminary injunction now, they will be harmed in a way that cannot be repaired; and requiring the State of Tennessee to abide by the U.S. Constitution, sooner rather than later, vindicates the public interest in rule by law and the acceptance, by States, of constitutional government. The court, therefore, has little difficulty concluding that the preliminary injunction should issue.”

Alongside a helping of legal jargon, the court documents for the case showcase some pointedly barbed comments, including this one: “Why did the General Assembly adopt the Act, more than two centuries into the State’s existence and after seemingly many decades of public restrooms being commonplace in Tennessee, and in America, without the need for such signage? The court, of course, cannot purport to know all of the dynamics that go into each legislator’s individual decision to support a bill.”

The law’s sponsor, Representative Tim Rudd, does not exactly look like the exemplar of fact-based legislation. The documents state he was “concerned” that some “hypothetical sexual predators” would “take advantage of” some public restroom policies to “assault or rape” other restroom users.

The exchange continues: “Shortly before that declaration, Rudd was asked by Tennessee House Speaker Pro Tempore Pat Marsh whether the State was ‘having a problem with this now, that you know of . . . anywhere.’ Rudd was unable to provide any examples or evidence of such a problem.”

Categories
News News Blog Uncategorized

Six Things to Know About the Lawsuits Challenging the State’s Anti-Trans Bathroom Law

This story is co-published with MLK50: Justice Through Journalism, a nonprofit Memphis newsroom focused on poverty, power, and public policy — issues about which Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. cared deeply. Find more stories like this at MLK50.com. Subscribe to their newsletter here.

In the past week, two federal lawsuits have been filed against the state’s new bathroom signage law, which takes effect today. The law applies to businesses and other places with multi-stall bathrooms that allow people to use the restroom of the gender with which they identify.

The businesses are required to post signage with the following state-mandated language: “Notice: This facility maintains a policy of allowing the use of restrooms by either biological sex, regardless of the designation on the restroom.”

One lawsuit was filed Friday by the American Civil Liberties Union and the ACLU of Tennessee. The plaintiffs are Nashville-based restaurateur Bob Bernstein, who founded and manages Bongo Roasting Co., and Kye Sayers, who owns Sanctuary, a performing arts venue and safe space for trans people in Chattanooga. 

The other was filed Wednesday by Mike Curb, owner of Curb Records Inc. in Nashville and properties open to the public. 

Here are six things you should know: 

  1. Their main argument: The law violates the plaintiffs’ First Amendment rights. 

The ACLU suit argues it violates plaintiffs’ freedom of speech by legally forcing them “to communicate a misleading and controversial government-mandated message that they would not otherwise display.”

The businesses “do not agree with this characterization of their policies, and they do not want to convey the Tennessee General Assembly’s controversial and stigmatizing message to customers, clients, and staff.”

  1. Both suits ask the court to declare the law unconstitutional and unenforceable.

They call for the court to preliminarily stop state and local officials from enforcing it and say that judgment should eventually be made permanent.  

  1. Plaintiff Mike Curb is a former Republican lieutenant governor of California.

He served in that role from 1979 to 1983 under former Democratic Gov. Jerry Brown. Curb was also co-chairman of President Ronald Reagan’s 1980 campaign, according to a Curb Inc. press release denouncing Tennessee’s anti-trans legislation, which was sponsored and backed by Republicans.

Along with civil rights activist Harvey Milk, Curb worked to stop California’s Briggs Initiative in 1978, which would have mandated firing teachers who were gay or in support of gay rights.

A coffee menu at Fido coffeehouse and restaurant in Nashville is decorated with LGBTQ flag colors in June. The owner of Fido, Bob Bernstein, is one of the plaintiffs in a lawsuit  filed against Tennessee over its new anti-trans bathroom law. (Credit: ACLU of Tennessee)

A coffee menu at Fido coffeehouse and restaurant in Nashville is decorated with LGBTQ flag colors in June. The owner of Fido, Bob Bernstein, is one of the plaintiffs in a lawsuit filed against Tennessee over its new anti-trans bathroom law. Photo courtesy of the ACLU of Tennessee

  1. Curb’s lawsuit argues that the law was a solution in search of a problem.

The law “was not enacted to address any real problem or actual public need,” the suit reads, relying on the words of the law’s House sponsor, Rep. Tim Rudd (R-Murfreesboro), to bolster its argument.

When asked during House floor debate by another lawmaker if there’s any other locality with a similar law, Rudd said he hadn’t researched it but saw a need in Tennessee. “It’s very shocking and can endanger people if they walk into a restroom that’s marked men or women and the opposite sex is standing there. It could scare them. It could provoke violence.”

  1. The law defies medical guidance on sex and ignores the existence of intersex people, according to the ACLU lawsuit.

By using the phrase “biological sex,” the law is unclear and intentionally discriminatory.

“Biological sex” is never defined in state law, and medical professionals say a person’s gender identity should be used for medical and legal purposes, the lawsuit says.

The lawsuit also argues that the law ignores the existence of intersex people by using the language “either biological sex.” 

  1. Both lawsuits say the signs will hurt businesses by driving away customers and inciting fear.

Posting signs at Curb’s businesses “risks driving away customers and visitors that they want to attract by forcing them to convey a message that conflicts with their corporate values of inclusion, diversity, equality, and respect for all people,” the lawsuit says.

Categories
News Blog News Feature

Anti-Trans “Bathroom Bill” on the Way to Governor

State lawmakers finally got their transgender bathroom rule that could come with this statement: No trans people were contacted in the making of this bill. 

State senators passed a bill Wednesday, April 21st, that could give transgender students “reasonable accommodations” to separate facilities, instead of allowing them to use the bathroom that lines up with their gender identity.

Students must do this through a written request that says they are “unwilling or unable to use a multi-occupancy restroom or change in a facility within the school building designate for the person’s sex.” Senate Democrats have said the move would provide “separate but equal” facilities and further stigmatize transgender students in Tennessee. 

The bill lays out an appeal process if the request is denied. It also lays out the pathway for students, teachers, or employees to sue the school if they encounter “a person of the opposite sex in a multi-occupancy restroom or changing facility designated for the person’s sex and located in a public school building.” That is, schools can be sued if they allow a transgender student use a bathroom for a gender other than what is listed on their birth certificates.

Republican lawmakers have tried and failed to pass a “bathroom bill” for years. The refreshed language in this year’s version has many calling it “bathroom bill 2.0.” The bill is now headed for Tennessee Governor Bill Lee’s desk for a signature that would make it a law.   

It protects the wellbeing of children and removes the burden of stress of accommodations from teachers, schools, parents, and students.

Sen. Mike Bell (R-Riceville)

”It protects the wellbeing of children and removes the burden of stress of accommodations from teachers, schools, parents, and students, providing a clear path forward for the schools in Tennessee,” said the bill’s sponsor, Sen. Mike Bell (R-Riceville). 

Bell paused his prepared remarks on the Senate floor Wednesday to say that ”this is an issue our schools are dealing with.” Bell claimed that a K-8th grade school in his district was now “dealing with this issue.”

Sen. Heidi Campbell (D-Nashville) asked Bell if, in making the bill, he consulted with any transgender people of their families. 

“No, I did not, Senator Campbell,” Bell replied. 

Campbell said she has spoken with “dozens” of transgender families and transgender children during the course of this legislative session. She said she also spent time learning about the views of those who support the legislation. She said “this is a civil rights issue” and it’s “hurting our children.”

There are human beings on the other side of these votes who will have to live with the fallout.

Sen. Heidi Campbell (D-Nashville)

“We all know that a conservative group is running this package of anti-trans bills across the country and because they’ve polled this issue and it tests well and it keeps people energized and it feeds media ratings,” Campbell said. “It’s identity politics and we all know how that works, but there are human beings on the other side of these votes who will have to live with the fallout.” 

No GOP senator rose to speak for the bill’s merits Wednesday. One only questioned whether or not giving “reasonable accommodation” for transgender students would infringe on facilities now offered to handicapped students.

Sen. Jeff Yarbro (D-Nashville) said the legislation will open the state up to litigation from a variety of different laws including the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Family Education Rights and Privacy Act. 

“We’re going to have lawsuits under the 14th Amendment, and we’re going to lose them,” Yarbro said. “It’s no wonder that we’re increasing the budget for settlements and litigators at the state level, and we’ll need to keep doing it because we are putting cities and our schools in a place where they’re going to be violating federal law.”

We are putting cities and our schools in a place where they’re going to be violating federal law.

Sen. Jeff Yarbro (D-Nashville)

The “bathroom bill” is but one of many bills targeting transgender people, especially students, before the Tennessee General Assembly this year. That group of bills has been dubbed the “Slate of Hate” by LGBTQ advocates. 

  “We cannot cancel our LGBT friends and family and our trans children out there,” Campbell said in her closing statement on the Senate floor Wednesday. “I just want to tell you, I’m sorry for the pain that this causes. We love you and we support you.”

The bill passed in a 21-7 vote along party lines. 

I’m sorry for the pain that this causes.

Sen. Heidi Campbell (D-Nashville)
Categories
Memphis Gaydar News

Tennessee Equality Project: ‘Slate of Hate’ Bills Back at Legislature Next Year

State Capitol building

When Tennessee lawmakers return to Nashville in about a month, so, too, will a slate of bills against the LGBTQ+ community called the “Slate of Hate,” according to the Tennessee Equality Project (TEP).

Here’s the latest on the bills from TEP —

The bills that will be back:

Among the bills returning is the anti-transgender student bathroom bill. It passed the Tennessee House this year and heads to the Senate State & Local Government Committee. This bill outrageously gives state legal support to public school districts that experiment with anti-transgender student policies.

Another is the adoption discrimination bill that would make private adoption/foster care agencies eligible for your tax dollars even if those agencies decide to turn away loving parents because of a parent’s sexual orientation, gender identity, or religious views. This bill has passed the House and will be on the floor of the Senate in the new year.

The old business license to discriminate bill will also return. It would prevent local governments from favoring businesses with inclusive policies in their contracting. That bill passed the House this year and will be up for consideration in the Senate State & Local Government Committee.


A new bill:

A right-wing organization in Tennessee recently announced its intention to have another go at attacking marriage equality. It’s called the “God-Given Marriage Initiative.” It would attempt to end marriage licensing and replace it with a man and a woman registering their marriage contract with the state. Where does that leave the LGBTQ community? We need to be ready to fight back so that we don’t have to find out.

Possible legislation:

A bill attacking transgender youth healthcare has been introduced in South Carolina. Legislators in Texas, Georgia, and Kentucky are said to be looking at similar bills. We should not be surprised to see such legislation in Tennessee.

Another possible bill is an attack on the inclusion of transgender people in Tennessee’s hate crimes law. In February of this year, the Attorney General issued an opinion saying that the word “gender” in the law means transgender people are covered and that means that Tennessee has the first inclusive hate crimes law in the South. But right-wing groups complained bitterly at the time and we should expect some effort to amend the law, leaving transgender people vulnerable again.

Categories
Politics Politics Feature

Clerb May Get a Legislative Windfall; “Bathroom Bill” Redux

NASHVILLE — That old saying about ill winds blowing somebody some good applies to the version of the community oversight bill passed on Monday night by the Tennessee Senate. In this case, it applies to supporters of the Civilian Law Enforcement Review Board (CLERB) in Memphis.

CLERB is the Bluff City’s equivalent of Nashville’s Community Oversight Board (C.O.B.), voted into being last November by voters in the state’s Capital city. It is the existence of the Nashville board and, in particular, the power of subpoena it was created with, that prompted the dominant Republican supermajority in the General Assembly to support Senate Bill 1407/House Bill 658, which would limit the powers of the C.O.B. — or of any community oversight board — to the mere advisory function toward the conduct of city law enforcement that CLERB enjoys.

In Memphis, only the Memphis City Council can employ a subpoena in relation to alleged excesses by the Memphis Police Department. CLERB can request one but cannot act on its own.

But SB 1407 contains amendments that would allow a methodology for subpoenas to be issued at the behest of a community oversight board. A Circuit Court or Chancery Court judge would have to approve the request, and it would have to be made by a chief of police, the internal affairs division of a police department, or a special investigator.

It is the provision for a special investigator that could expand the powers of CLERB. That was the conclusion reached by two Democratic Memphis state Senators — Raumesh Akbari and Katrina Robinson — in the wake of their No vote for the Senate measure, taken, as they acknowledged, out of solidarity with Nashville Democrats who resisted the measure. (The other Memphis Democrat in the Senate, Sara Kyle, also voted against the measure.)

But, as Akbari said afterward, almost in the hushed tone of someone who had found money along a walking path and realized she might have to relinquish it to a claimant at some point, “This would allow CLERB to hire a special investigator in Memphis and ask for subpoenas. That’s something they can’t do now.” Robinson concurred with that sentiment.

The “claimant” in Nashville that could nullify this apparent stroke of fortune for CLERB advocates is the other legislative chamber, where HB 658, the House version of the C.O.B. bill would make no allowance for any subpoena power for a civilian oversight board.

At some point, representatives of the two legislative chambers are likely to sit in conference to determine a final agreed-upon version of the oversight measure. Supporters of CLERB will find themselves waiting to see which way the wind blows.

• In the Tennessee General Assembly, legislation on matters of sexual orientation is often introduced in disguise or in Trojan Horse measures designed to conceal the actual purpose of a measure. Such was the case last Wednesday in the House Criminal Justice subcommittee, when HB 1151 by Representative John Ragan (R-Oak Ridge) came up for discussion.

In brief, what the bill does is designate a series of places (bathrooms, locker rooms, dressing rooms) as “public areas” where laws against indecent exposure would apply.

Candidly enough, Ragan began accounting for the bill’s purpose with a “background” explanation that it was needed to “ensure clarity” because of the Obama administration’s having intervened on behalf of transgender students using facilities other than those for “whatever they were naturally.” Ragan went on to mention rulings that “created a lot of confusion” and threatened the state with a loss of federal funding.

He was about to delve further into those circumstances when Representative Michael Curcio (R-Dickson), evidently alarmed at this fiddling with the lid of a Pandora’s box and the overt disclosure of the transgender issue, interrupted with a challenge that Ragan’s explanation had nothing to do with “the bill that was called.”

Uncomprehending that he had pulled aside what was meant to be a veil, Ragan protested that what he had said was merely the necessary background.

Curcio interrupted again: “I don’t think it is.” And he stressed that the bill merely identified the aforementioned “public places” as areas where strictures against indecent exposure would apply. “And that’s all it does.”

Unavoidably, as discussion of the bill became general, it was acknowlledged that the bill went on to describe these newly identified places as “designated for single-sex, multi-person use, if the offender is a member of the opposite sex designated for use.”

It became obvious, in short, that HB 1151 was a redux version of the infamous “bathroom bill,” scrubbed away in the previous two legislative seasons, due largely to pressure from the state’s business communities.

Alarmed at the unintended forthrightness of the developing discussion, committee chair Andrew Farmer (R-Sevierville) took up the argument for the bill from both Ragan and Curcio, explaining, in effect, that there was nothing to see here. “We’re just making it clear that those are public places.” Indecent exposure, he said, was “already a crime.”

Representative Antonio Parkinson, a Memphis Democrat and this year’s chairman of the Shelby County delegation, wondered in that case why it was necessary to spell out restrooms, locker rooms, and so forth. Farmer replied that too many laws are “vague” and that they should be “tight.”

Parkinson persisted: “If a person walks into anywhere and exposes themselves to someone, that’s criminal already, so why are we adding this to it?”

Farmer repeated: “We don’t need vague laws. We need to be specific so the public understands our intent.” Parkinson threw up his hands. “If that’s true, we don’t have enough room or space in our law library” for the places that could be listed. “We didn’t list this room, and I’m not trying to be funny.”

As for Farmer’s concern that the public understand the intent of the legislation, Representative William Lamberth (R-Portland), the House majority leader, had meanwhile spelled it out:

“Until recent years,” Lamberth said, “it was not envisioned that individuals with anatomical differences would be in the bathrooms of the opposite sex.” The bill, he said, “recognizes that in today’s world there may be individuals biologically of one sex in a bathroom that may be marked for another sex.” A bathroom, he said, was “not actually in the code as a public place, though it may be more of a public place than it once was.”

With all the blinders off and the euphemisms cast aside, the newly revived bathroom bill was passed on this week to the full Judiciary Committee, which is very likely to become a highly public place itself.

Paul Rose (R-Covington) was sworn in last week by Lieutenant Governor Randy McNally (top, right) as new state senator for District 32, which covers a part of Memphis.

Categories
Cover Feature News

Nashville Gets Serious

The timetable of the Tennessee General Assembly once sprawled a bit, with a session ending sometime in May, generally. But now and then, one would get into June and even, within the memory of many legislators still serving, go on later than that.

There was the time in 2001 when Jimmy Naifeh, the longtime speaker of the state House of Representatives and a no-nonsense legislative boss if there ever was one, stepped down from his perch on the House dais, stood for a moment in the well, and took a few steps into the main central aisle of the chamber, as if he meant to do something hands-on.

Photographs by Jackson Baker

Rep. G.A. Hardaway and other Civil Justice subcommittee members that state law overrides a U.S. Supreme Court decision.

The look on Naifeh’s face was somewhere between wrathful and pleading, as he intoned loudly, “It’s July, folks!”

Indeed it was. Those were the years, from the late 1990s into the early years of the current century, when state government, grappling with looming financial shortages of all kinds, and struggling in particular with the costs of the ever-expanding rolls of TennCare, was looking desperately for ways to raise money.

The impasse had gotten to the point that Republican Governor Don Sundquist, a dependable fiscal conservative during his years as a Reaganite Congressman, broke with his own personal history and his party’s traditional philosophical base and proposed something as daring as a state income tax. One result of that was a mass protest, whetted by radio talk-show hosts, that culminated, on the night of July 12, 2001, in an unruly mob invasion of the state Capitol and its grounds.

Dianne Baker of Millington was one of several spokespersons for Shelby County’s suburbs who gave the county’s legislative delegation an earful last week.

Windows got broken, the heavy locked doors of the state Senate chamber, where a compromise income-tax package was being negotiated, were pounded on, and whatever deal had been about to happen there was aborted.

There would not be a fiscal solution of any kind until the next year, a time when several parks were closed and various state services had begun to be shut down. Forgoing the national holiday, the two legislative chambers met on July 4th and agreed to a patchwork revenue package based on hiking the state sales tax to its current rate.

The same year, a Democratic governor, former health-care entrepreneur, and ex-Nashville Mayor Phil Bredesen, was elected. He would prove as atypical to his party’s image as Sundquist had been to his. Launching an austerity regime, Bredesen slashed the TennCare rolls and imposed across-the-board departmental budget cuts of 8 percent.

get some pressure from the press.

And thus did one era make way for another.

The next 15 years in state government would see a progressive slide away from governmental activism toward various kinds of retrenchment. The temper of the state’s voters shifted, and both Naifeh and the state Senate’s venerable Democratic Speaker John Wilder would eventually have to surrender control of their chambers to Republicans — though the new House Speaker, Beth Harwell, a Nashvillian, would be somewhat more mellow in her conservatism than Ron Ramsey of Kingsport, who displaced Wilder in the Senate.

The populism of the left yielded year by year to the populism of the right. The famous argument over guns versus butter would be decided in favor of guns. Literally so, as the NRA and the home-grown Tennessee Firearms Association began having their way with legislators, and it became harder and harder to find public places that were off limits to lethal weaponry. Bars, parks, parking lots, schools — all yielded in turn to legislation backed by the gun lobby.

Senator Jeff Yarbro of Nashville wait their turn.

Attitudes toward education shifted, as well. Where once the focus of public education had been on the teaching incentives of Governor Lamar Alexander or the fiscal largesse and curricular pump-priming of Governor Ned McWherter’s Basic Education Plan (BEP), now it was channeled through various formulas that were deconstructive of the traditional public-school concept and smacked of privatization at their core.

At the insistence of Ramsey, who saw the Tennessee Education Association as a political adversary, teachers’ bargaining rights were legislated out of existence. And even the more moderate Republican governor, oil-company scion Bill Haslam, gave the go-ahead to a veritable plethora of concepts — charter schools, takeover districts administered by the state, online “districts” run by profit-seekers from out of state, and standardized testing as an apparent end in itself — that unraveled the whole notion of what public schools had been.

Having basically slain the idea of an income tax, progressive or otherwise, the new Republican legislative majority (a super-majority in both chambers after 2014, assured of majority votes without need of — or concern for — Democratic votes) took steps to make sure it stayed dead, authorizing a state referendum on a constitutional ban of a state income tax authored by state Senator Brian Kelsey (R-Germantown).

Three legislative veterans from Shelby County, all former state representatives, were among those who turned up last week at a reunion for General Assembly members at the Ellington Agricultural Center in Nashville. From l to r: Ed Haley, now city manager of Millington; Chris Turner, now a General Sessions Criminal Court judge; and Dan Byrd, now vice chairman and COO of the Bank of Bartlett. Haley was a Republican; Turner and Byrd served as Democrats.

As was the case with Republicanism in the nation as a whole, the state’s new GOP establishment was a strange yokedom of fiscal and social conservatives, whereby the advocates of, say, tort reform limiting awards in personal-damage litigation made common cause with the opponents of abortion and gay rights. And vice versa.

There was a nether end of the reigning coalition, too. With the stripped-down Democratic caucus depending heavily on minority members, racial and otherwise, there was a certain kind of reactionary sentiment to be found on the other side — embodied, arguably, in the GOP insistence for photo-ID voting and, without doubt, in the “discovery” by two Republican legislators of a potential jihadist foot-bath in the Capitol that turned out to be a mop sink.

And who could forget the immortal legislative contributions of former Republican state Senator Stacey Campfield (R-Knoxville), a one-man cornucopia of bizarre and mean-spirited legislation — a bill calling for death certificates for aborted fetuses, his “Don’t-say-Gay” bill forbidding mention of homosexuality in elementary school, another measure requiring school personnel to out gay students to their parents, a bill to deny welfare payments to parents of poorly performing students, his charge of racism when he, a white, was denied membership in the Legislative Black Caucus, etc.

here testifying against the “natural marriage” bill before the House Civil Justice Subcommittee, has stayed busy on the civil liberties front.

Those bills did not pass, but, as much as the gun zealotry of the last several legislative sessions, the goofy stuff from the now departed Campfield (he was defeated in the 2014 GOP primary by the infinitely more dignified Richard Briggs) became a metaphor of sorts for what was arguably an unserious period in Tennessee legislative history — one that rewarded selfish and peripheral concerns at the expense of fundamental structural needs.

(Campfield’s bills may have gone by the wayside, but the legislature did, after all, vote in all solemnity to enshrine the Barrett .50 caliber as the Official State Rifle; and it failed by a trice to designate the Bible as the Official State Book.)

Things may be changing.

Against all odds, Nashville seems to be getting serious. And, ironically, a signal of that potential transformation came last week through the aegis of a major participant in the events of July 12, 2001, that pivotal moment when a mob action deflected an effort toward a long-term reform.

One of those actively involved that night in working out the compromise that might have yielded a workable income-tax measure was a Republican state Senator from Chattanooga named David Fowler. After leaving the legislature in 2006, Fowler donated $20,000 to an organization called the Family Action Council of Tennessee (FACT). The former state senator and lawyer ultimately became the chief spokesperson for FACT, which advocates social conservatism and attention to fundamentalist Christian concerns in public policy.

Now president of FACT, Fowler lives in Nashville and is an accustomed presence on Capitol Hill. Last year he famously led a group of conservative pastors in a rally on behalf of a bill that would compel transgender students to use bathrooms designated for their birth genders. The issue was one of several these days, in Tennessee and many another states, which contrast the social traditions of a social or religious group with the economic realities of the state as a whole.

Mindful of this inherent conflict, Fowler hit it head on, acknowledging that passage of the bill might cause the state to lose important conventions and forfeit possible industrial relocations, but calling on the legislature to “put their principles and their conscience above matters of mere economics.”

But the matter, of course, was — and is — more complex than that. In the 21st century, the dichotomy cannot be reduced to one of money versus morality. Words like “principles” and “conscience” can also be adduced, and increasingly are so adduced, to support an evolving social belief in the human and legal rights of transgenders.

When push came to shove, that fact probably did as much or more to tip the balance in legislators’ minds against the “bathroom bill,” as did the admittedly intense lobbying against it by the state’s business interests. The bill’s sponsor, Representative Susan Lynn (R-Mt. Juliet) withdrew the measure.

But it returned in this session, sponsored by Representative Mark Pody (R-Lebanon) and Senator Mae Beavers (R-Mt.Juliet), two legislators lacking in the theatrical flair of a Campfield but equally prone to playing Horatio-at-the-Gate for causes which an increasing number of their legislative colleagues see as retrograde and wrong-headed.

And this year the bill failed even to get a motion out of the Senate Education Committee, a fact which both shocked and gratified Henry Seaton of the ACLU, who observed that “it seems like we are making progress” in raising legislators’ consciousness on the transgender issue.

And then there was what was called the “Natural Marriage” bill, also sponsored by the duo of Pody and Beavers. And there was Fowler in the House Civil Justice Subcommittee last week, making the best argument he could for a measure, reserving marriage in Tennessee to cases involving a man and a woman, that manifestly is in conflict with the U.S. Supreme Court’s watershed 2015 opinion in the Obergefell v. Hodges cases declaring same-sex marriages legal everywhere in the United States.

Fowler’s argument — that, while the Supreme Court’s opinion compelled Tennessee to recognize same-sex marriages in other states, it did not invalidate the state’s own ability to define marriage within its own borders — was ingenious in a sense, but it also had the taint of the disingenuous. Memphis Democrat G.A. Hardaway called him on it, pointing out further that Fowler was a party to two separate lawsuits challenging the Supreme Court’s authority to deal with state marriage laws — a potential conflict of interest.

Like the lawsuits he was engaged in, Fowler’s testimony was seemingly based on the highly questionable thesis that the U.S. Supreme Court had no authority to override a state law on marriage — notwithstanding the obvious fact that the court had done just that.

In the end, the committee by unanimous agreement did what a legislative unit normally does for bills with no chances of passage. It punted, “rolling” the bill, in legislative vernacular — until a late point in the next session.

A clear pattern seemed to be developing in this session of the General Assembly. With, at most, a month left to go in the 2017 session, all attention was being focused, not on the kinds of tendentious and eccentric measures that had dominated so much of the legislature’s recent history but on indisputably serious matters relating to the root realities of the state itself — or to the counties and municipalities that comprise it.

The session’s chief gun bill, an “open carry” bill eliminating a need for permits to carry a concealed weapon, was disposed of summarily last week, in the same session of the House Civil Justice Subcommittee that shunted aside “natural marriage.”

That measure, HB 40, co-sponsored by Representative Micah Van Huss (R-Jonesborough) and Beavers (who seems almost Zelig-like in her attachment to fringe bills), was dismissed in the committee by voice vote.

As the General Assembly hits the stretch in the 2017 session, it will be focusing its major efforts on the centerpiece of Haslam’s agenda, an infrastructure program announced in his State of the State message of late January.

This governor is given to catchy titles for his major legislation. There was Tennessee Promise, his name for a scholarship program, paid for mainly by money diverted from the lottery-built Hope Scholarship fund, paying student expenses at the state’s community colleges. There was Tennessee Reconnect, a scholarship program for adults needing to finish lapsed degree efforts.

Most memorably, there was Insure Tennessee, Haslam’s name for a plan that, through a waiver granted by Barack Obama’s Department of Health and Human Services, would have allowed Tennessee to partake of an estimated billion dollars or more of annual federal funding to expand TennCare, Tennessee’s version of Medicaid.

A partisan reaction by the GOP super-majority to a program it identified with “Obamacare” killed Insure Tennessee, but the newly serious legislature might give some version of the program a re-examination, especially since the Trump administration in Washington failed in its preliminary efforts to kill the ACA.

In any case, the Haslam infrastructure proposal, an ambitious and long overdue program of roadway rehabilitation billed in the State-of-the-State as the Improve Act, is still very much alive, though the governor’s original proposal for financing the plan’s $10 billion worth of improvements with a 7-percent increase in the state gas tax, coupled with decreases in a variety of other taxes, including the sales tax on groceries, has been modified once or twice and is subject to more changes. It is up for consideration in finance committees of both chambers this week.

Think of it: A General Assembly that once actually wasted time on the legality of eating roadkill is now clearly training attention on the condition of Tennessee’s roads.

One important modification to the Improve Act occurred in a Senate committee, with an amendment sponsored by state Senate Majority Leader Mark Norris (R-Collierville). Norris, who is eyeing a 2018 gubernatorial race (and who has billboards in Shelby County and elsewhere proclaiming him to be “Fighting Elder Abuse in Tennessee”), made sure to include in the bill several financial-relief provisions for Tennessee’s military veterans and its elderly population.

Even as the legislature’s Republican leadership is settling down to serious business, its once-dominant Democratic contingent, now become a shrunken minority (5 senators out of 33; 25 Democrats out of 99), is into a comeback of sorts, pointing out in a recent end-of-week press conference that Norris’ amendment has a distinct resemblance to provisions long championed by themselves. The Democrats, led by Representative Craig Fitzhugh of Ripley in the House and Memphian Lee Harris in the Senate, are also campaigning hard for a revival of some variant of Insure Tennessee.

Matters still to be resolved include two key ones of major importance to Memphis and Shelby County — a proposal for a “pilot program” of publicly funded private-school vouchers, restricted to the Shelby County Schools system and a possible revisiting of the de-annexation issue that has roiled relations between Memphis and its suburbs. (See Politics: “They’re Back!”.)

In any case, things have unmistakably taken a serious turn up Nashville way. Anybody who doubts that should ask former state Representatives Jeremy Durham of Franklin and Mark Lovell of Eads, both forced out of their legislative positions during the last year for allegations of sexual hanky-panky.

Heck, folks, hanky-panky used to be the General Assembly’s very stock-in-trade!

Categories
News The Fly-By

New App Maps Trans-Friendly Bathrooms

As the U.S. battles over transgender rights, one smartphone app is making it easier for transgender people to access safe, public restrooms.

Refuge Restrooms — an app that indexes and maps inclusive bathrooms across the county for transgender, intersex, and gender-nonconforming individuals — has identified only six trans-friendly restrooms in Memphis. It lists two at the University of Memphis, one at Otherlands Coffee Shop, and three at Starbucks.

Refuge’s initial 45,000 nationwide entries were borrowed from a now-defunct database named Safe2Pee. When the Safe2Pee app became inoperative, California resident Teagan Widmer founded the Refuge app out of personal necessity.

bathrooms.

“I started publicly identifying as transgender [in 2010] while I was in graduate school in Richmond, Virginia,” Widmer, 27, said. “I found myself scared for my safety a lot and didn’t have the confidence I have now.”

In North Carolina, Refuge users have dropped pins at about 400 secure restrooms since Governor Pat McCrory signed House Bill 2 — nicknamed the “bathroom bill” — into law. The new law requires transgender people to use public restrooms that correspond with their sex at birth. A similar bill failed to pass last month in Tennessee.

The bathroom debate has sparked a national conversation about trans rights, and last week, it led President Barack Obama to issue a directive that public schools across the country should adopt trans-friendly bathroom policies or risk losing federal education funding. Governor Bill Haslam has expressed disagreement with Obama’s directive.

Anti-trans legislation, such as the North Carolina bill, passes when there’s pervasive misinformation, says assistant University of Memphis journalism professor Robert Byrd, who researches gender in the media.

“For decades, the only transgender representations people have been exposed to are the images on television and film, which were generally of sick or deviant people with a propensity for crime and violence or just the butt of a joke,” Byrd says. “It’s easy for some to believe the argument that transgender people in bathrooms that correspond to their expressed gender poses a threat to children because the narrative we see in popular culture supports that notion. This lack of knowledge helps fuel the fire of the bathroom bills.”

Lisa Michaels Hancock, a transgender woman living in Memphis, says public restrooms should be gender-neutral.

“I am a 6-foot-3 amazon that looks butch,” Hancock said. “On more than one occasion, I have been told I’m in the wrong restroom. My reply is ‘I have a vagina,’ which shouldn’t matter, but it usually shuts them up. I tell my girlfriends in advance that I won’t carry on conversations in restrooms because some women get thrown off by my voice, which isn’t very feminine.”

The problems Tennessee transgender people face extend beyond the bathroom. A court-ordered name change and letter certifying reassignment surgery must be presented with an application to change name or gender on any Tennessee identification. Tennessee also prohibits changing an individual’s sex on their birth certificate.

Since one in five transgender people experience homelessness, according to the National Healthcare for the Homeless Council, Widmer says she would like to eventually see Refuge serve as a housing resource for the transgender community.

Her app meets the needs of people who Widmer didn’t consider, too, which she was pleased to learn.

“One woman wrote me and explained that her adult son has severe Downs syndrome, and she uses Refuge to find gender-neutral restrooms that are single stall where she can accompany her son to assist him,” Widmer said. “It’s really easy to get caught up in the fight of it all, but ultimately for me, it’s about the people who are being affected. My only goal is to make their lives easier, and I think Refuge does that.”