On Friday, legislators from the Republican party in the state House of Representatives successfully passed a bill which prohibits gender-affirming medical procedures for transgender minors, as well as the utilization of public funds to cover such treatments. This marks the final significant obstacle in the bill’s journey towards Governor Greg Gianforte’s approval.
The chamber’s near party-line vote on Senate Bill 99 largely matched the body’s first vote on the bill Thursday — all but three Republicans supported the measure after less than an hour of debate. It will now be returned to the Senate chamber, where it was approved in February, for consideration of two amendments adopted by House lawmakers.
Transgender Montanans, along with their family members and medical professionals, have strongly criticized SB 99, labeling it as a discriminatory policy that infringes upon human rights. The Republican majority in Montana’s Legislature, however, has advocated for this legislation, arguing that it is aimed at safeguarding minors from making irreversible decisions regarding medical treatments such as puberty blockers and hormones, which they might come to regret in the future.
During the House floor debate on Thursday, members of the majority party expressed agreement with that evaluation.
“Our kids are our future. Everybody knows that. They need our protection,” said Rep. Terry Falk, R-Kalispell, holding up a copy of the bill. “In my opinion, this is what compassion looks like.”
Democrats criticized the argument, stating that SB 99 would negatively impact young individuals and families by infringing upon medical freedom and parental decision-making.
“The fact is that there are kids and parents and members of the LGBT community in this room, in this building, in communities all across the state. They are your constituents, your community members, your colleagues,” said Rep. SJ Howell, D-Missoula, and Montana’s first openly nonbinary lawmaker. “They deserve the dignity and the respect and the equal treatment under the law that all Montanans deserve. And SB 99 absolutely is an affront to that.”
The bill, sponsored by Sen. John Fuller, R-Kalispell, mimics bans on gender-affirming care for youth passed in other states. Some of those, including laws passed in Arkansas and Alabama, have been blocked in federal court. A recent report by the national advocacy group Human Rights Campaign found that 22.9% of transgender youth live in a state that has passed bans on care. Another 27.5% of that demographic could stand to lose access to care if states, including Montana, approve legislation that is currently pending.
Just hours before House lawmakers were set to vote on the bill, LGBTQ civil rights groups declared their plan to sue in representation of transgender minors if SB 99 becomes law. They labeled the legislation as a prohibition on the sole evidence-based treatments for gender dysphoria in youth.
The release from Lambda Legal, the American Civil Liberties Union, and the ACLU of Montana expressed concern about Montana lawmakers’ strong determination to align with other states in endangering the well-being and survival of transgender youth. This stance runs counter to the extensive scientific and medical evidence that supports the appropriateness and necessity of providing them with proper care. The release emphasized that transgender youth in Montana should receive the essential support and care required to afford them an equal opportunity to flourish, just like their peers.
The spokesperson for the governor’s office declined to address the specific inquiries regarding Gianforte’s position on SB 99. However, they mentioned that the governor will thoroughly evaluate all bills forwarded by the Legislature. Gianforte has the options to either sign, veto, or let the bill become law without his signature.
If SB 99 is implemented, families with transgender children have conveyed their frustration and lack of clarity regarding their prospects in the state.
Poe Hamilton, a Manhattan resident about to celebrate their 14th birthday, expressed on Friday that their main focus should be on enjoying their childhood rather than being concerned about the future accessibility of medical care for treating gender dysphoria. Hamilton also disagreed with the Republican representation of SB 99 as beneficial for transgender youth. They believed that it would have been more beneficial if lawmakers had taken the time to listen to the perspectives of the affected kids.
Hamilton expressed his belief that before making any significant decision, it is essential to have a conversation with the individuals who may be impacted by it. He questioned the value of a decision made solely by someone who is not directly involved in the situation, emphasizing the importance of considering the perspectives and needs of those who are directly affected.
Hamilton’s parents expressed gratitude for having an “exit plan,” which grants them the opportunity to relocate to a different state when the circumstances align. They acknowledged that not all families possess this privileged option.
Callie, Hamilton’s mother, expressed the dilemma by saying, “Should we relocate and abandon the state? It’s a tough decision, especially since our children are sixth-generation Montanans. Our family resides here, we are passionate about our jobs, our friends are here, and we are actively engaged in the community. It completely disrupts our entire life.”
