UPDATE: House Bill 234, which revises the application of Montana’s obscenity law to public school employees, passed its final vote on the House floor Thursday, Feb. 9, 53-45. It now moves to the Senate for consideration.
Considerable debate was ignited in the Montana House on Wednesday due to a couple of legislative proposals. The discussion revolved around the potential consequences of these proposals on transgender youth and the level of control that local authorities have over the state’s public school system.
The first arose during a morning hearing in the House Judiciary Committee. Lawmakers fielded testimony on House Bill 361, introduced by Rep. Brandon Ler, R-Savage, which would change Montana law to explicitly state that misgendering a transgender student or calling them by their dead name — the name they were given at birth — is not considered a discriminatory practice. The bill would also prohibit school districts from disciplining such behaviors.
Ler described the bill as a way to protect students from facing repercussions from teachers or school authorities due to unintentional remarks. He portrayed gender identity as a strict concept that excludes transgender individuals, comparing it to teaching his three children, from an early age, that cows are cows and bulls are bulls.
Ler expressed, “Just picture a scenario where one day my son goes to school and discovers that the facts he has learned are no longer considered true. What’s more, he could face consequences for not adhering to these new truths.”
Ler’s position was seconded by the bill’s lone supporter, Montana Family Foundation President Jeff Laszloffy, who speculated on the difficulties teachers face in instructing students to use appropriate pronouns. In some schools, Laszloffy said, failure to do so can “land a student in serious trouble,” pointing to a 2022 incident in a Wisconsin school that triggered a Title IX investigation.
Ler’s interpretation of the matter, as well as the proposed bill, triggered a strong negative reaction from numerous transgender youth, LGBTQ advocates, and public school educators. They contended that HB 361 would create an environment where bullying and harassment could go unchecked. During the committee hearing, Kassia Finn, a mother of three, shared the challenges her son faced due to bullying related to his gender identity while in school. These difficulties, Finn explained, led her family to relocate across the state in order to ensure their children’s safety. Once Finn concluded her testimony, her son Max approached the microphone to speak.
Finn, a transgender student, shared with lawmakers that he has experienced severe bullying in the past, to the extent that he would pretend to be sick in order to leave school early. He continued to explain that he still faces verbal abuse and is subjected to derogatory names, as well as being physically tripped in the hallways. While his teachers attempt to intervene, the bullying persists on a daily basis. Finn emphasized that if his teachers are unable or unwilling to address the issue, the situation escalates and becomes even more unbearable.
Nearly a dozen other opponents shared similar stories of the challenges they have encountered due to their gender identities. During the testimony, SK Rossi represented the Human Rights Campaign and recounted a personal experience involving their nephew. Rossi’s nephew attempted to educate a friend about respecting a transgender classmate, but despite the effort, the friend persisted in misgendering the classmate. As a result, Rossi’s nephew decided to end the friendship. According to Rossi, this story demonstrates that HB 361 is unnecessary, as students are capable of effectively navigating these conversations on their own.
Rossi expressed concern about the bill, stating that it hinders schools, teachers, and administrators from intervening in a situation before it escalates into physical harm. He emphasized that waiting until it turns physical is already too late.
HB 361 is being criticized by educators and parents who believe it not only jeopardizes anti-bullying efforts in Montana schools but also challenges local control. Emily Dean, the director of advocacy for the Montana School Boards Association, expressed concerns that the proposal would prevent district officials from enforcing bullying and discrimination policies that were approved by their elected school board trustees. Sarah Piper, speaking on behalf of the Montana Federation of Public Employees, stated that these policies should be established at the local level rather than through governmental intervention.
Chloe Runs Behind, representing the nonprofits Forward Montana and Montana Women Vote, expressed the same concern.
Runs Behind stated that the purpose of this bill is to enhance government oversight of Montana public schools, limiting the authority of teachers and administrators to create a secure atmosphere for all students. He emphasized that his intention is not to advocate for a harsh approach in schools, but rather to empower them to address and prevent disrespectful and harmful conduct.
As the hearing turned to questions from the committee, Rep. Jed Hinkle, R-Belgrade, sought to reframe the discussion from a different angle. He directed his inquiry at Dean, from the Montana School Boards Association, asking whether a student with certain beliefs about gender should be “forced to violate their own conscience, their own sense of reality” or feel their beliefs are respected. Dean reiterated her stance that conversations of that nature are, under state law and the Montana Constitution, rightly the purview of local officials and community members. However, she acknowledged that “every student wants to feel respected and should feel respected.”
Rep. Donavon Hawk, D-Butte, then redirected Hinkle’s question to Kevin Hamm, an HB 361 opponent and LGBTQ activist from Helena.
Hamm responded, “When it comes to evaluating how someone treats another person, it all boils down to the level of respect they demonstrate. Regarding your inquiry, trans individuals do indeed exist. Your personal dislike for them is inconsequential. It is important to respect and treat them kindly. Failing to do so will result in encountering individuals like myself, who no longer hold respect for you and reciprocate the disrespect you have shown others.”
Later on Wednesday, the state House passed a bill targeting “obscene” material in public schools following an emotional debate featuring testimony from Montana’s first two transgender lawmakers.
House Bill 234, sponsored by Rep. Bob Phalen, R-Lindsay, would apply criminal penalties to public school employees who display or distribute to minors any material that is determined to meet the state’s definition of obscene.The bill passed 55-45, with several Republicans joining all Democrats in opposing the measure.
Phalen stated that his bill simply aims to equalize schools with other entities already included in the state’s obscenity law.
He explained that the absence of obscene acts or pictures on billboards is due to this reason. In a gas station, such content would be concealed instead of being openly displayed. The proposed code revision aims to elevate our public schools to the same standards as the local gas station.
The push to eliminate ostensibly obscene materials in schools is central to the self-styled parental rights movement, which has expressed criticism in Montana over pandemic-era masking protocols and school policies built around educational equity. At a national level, grassroots parental rights organizations such as Moms for Liberty have also zeroed in on books describing or depicting the experience of young transgender people, chief among them the graphic-novel-style memoir “Gender Queer.”
Montana librarians collaborated with Every Library, a national organization, to distribute copies of “Gender Queer” on lawmakers’ desks on Wednesday. The books were individually wrapped in different colors, creating a vibrant rainbow pattern when arranged together. In contrast, Phalen distributed panels from the book that he personally considered to be explicit.
“It is not focusing on obscenity, but rather on individuals like me… and my life, my existence, is far from being obscene.”
Rep. Zooey Zephyr, D-Missoula
Holding up a copy of “Gender Queer” on the floor, Rep. SJ Howell, D-Missoula, who is trans and non-binary, argued that there is “value in this book,” particularly for individuals who see “their experience, their perspective” reflected back at them. Rep. Zooey Zephyr, D-Missoula, who is transgender, said that the organizations backing changes to obscenity laws aren’t focusing on AP Literature classics like the “Canterbury Tales,” “Catcher in the Rye” or the famously violent “Blood Meridian,” but rather on books that discuss race and sexual orientation.
Zephyr stated that the focus is not on censoring obscenity, but rather on individuals like themselves. Zephyr emphasized that their life and existence are not offensive in any way.
Advocates of Phalen’s bill argue that their main concern is safeguarding children and they doubt the ability of teachers and school boards to adequately protect them from explicit content. They claim that books such as “Gender Queer” are inappropriately exposing students to sexual material.
Rep. Neil Duram, R-Eureka, reminisced about pursuing the “thirst for knowledge” in his school library. But “sexualization is not that thirst for knowledge.”
The bill’s Republican critics concentrated on its implications for school officials, arguing that it would criminalize their actions and encroach upon the authority of local school board trustees. These trustees hold the responsibility of approving curricula.
“As a conservative, I’m compelled to resist the heavy hand of state government interfering with what can and should be handled at the local level,” Rep. David Bedey, R-Hamilton, said.
Additionally, he pointed out that the definition of obscenity in the state’s law can change, and the specific part of the code that Phalen’s bill amends is not effective. The initial clause of the statute pertains to individuals responsible for commercial establishments or newsstands, meaning it does not apply to school librarians.
Bedey stated that he acknowledges that tomorrow on social media, there will likely be claims that individuals who are against House Bill 234 are pornographers or worse. He acknowledges that this is the unfortunate reality of social media today. However, he personally cannot support the bill due to his belief that it is ineffective, goes against conservative principles, and specifically targets school employees.
The bill requires one additional vote on the House floor before it can proceed to the Senate.
The Legislature is taking up a number of GOP-backed bills this session concerning transgender representation and expression, including a proposal to bar minors from attending drag shows. That bill, House Bill 359, will appear before the House Judiciary Committee on Thursday.
