Assembly Passes Bill to Protect Transsexuals

AB 196 by Assemblyman Mark Leno (D-San Francisco) passed after a lengthy debate in which Democrats argued that the bill was about basic civil rights, and Republicans attacked it as a "job-killer" that would drive California employers out of state.

If the bill passes the Senate as expected and is signed by the governor, it will make California the fourth state in the nation to ban discrimination against transgender people. Minnesota, Rhode Island and New Mexico have already done so, and more than a dozen local governments in California have passed ordinances with similar objectives.

Gov. Gray Davis has not taken a position on the bill, said spokesman Russ Lopez.

Leno's legislation would amend the state Fair Employment and Housing Act, which already bans discrimination based on a person's religion, race, ancestry, sex and sexual orientation, among other attributes. Leno would expand that list to include "gender."

His bill uses the definition of gender in the state education and penal codes, where gender is described as a person's identity, appearance or behavior, whether or not that identity, appearance or behavior is different from that traditionally associated with the person's sex at birth.

Leno's bill, which he said would affect more than 100,000 Californians, allows employers to set standards of appearance, grooming and dress, as long as a worker is allowed to dress consistently with his or her preferred gender.

The Department of Fair Employment and Housing can issue a wide range of penalties for violations.

Punishments range from restoration of back pay and promotions to damages and civil fines of as much as $10,000 for housing discrimination and $150,000 for job discrimination.

Supporters said that discrimination against those who do not dress and behave like the male or female they were born as is a widespread and serious problem.

"Across California, people are fired, denied promotions, denied adequate housing because of gender discrimination," said Assemblyman Paul Koretz (D-West Hollywood)."Unemployment rates are egregiously high among transgender people due to workplace discrimination. Estimates run as high as 70% unemployment. As a result, many transgender people wind up homeless."

But Republicans called the bill an unfair burden on employers, especially those who may be morally opposed to transgender behavior.

Assemblyman Rick Keene, (R-Chico), argued that Leno's legislation would prevent a business owner from controlling the image projected by his or her business.

"Everyone would feel that individuals ought to have the right to dress the way they feel is appropriate on their own time," Keene said, "but we have also guarded the right for businesses to decide what kind of images they want to put forwardThis would fly in the face of that."

The bill passed 41 to 34, with five Assembly members not voting. It failed to win all 48 Democratic votes in the 80-member lower house of the Legislature.

Fourteen members rose to speak about the bill, including Assemblyman John Longville (D-Rialto). He compared the bill with the civil rights legislation of the 1960s to ban discrimination against people based on skin color.

"Think about how you're going to explain your vote two or three decades down the road to your grandchildren," Longville warned Republicans.

Assemblyman Tony Strickland (R-Moorpark) said he would easily explain his no vote to grandchildren as a rejection of the state's attempt to impose its views on employers and landlords.

AB 196 is the first bill backed by the Assembly's new five-member Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Caucus to clear the Assembly.


I think the public does not really understand the ramification of this if it passes. Minnesota has a similar law. A male highschool librarian began dressing as a woman and started using the women's restroom. A female teacher took it to court and of course, ACLU went to bat for the the crossdresser. He won. What he won was the right to enter any female restroom in the highschool including the girls' restroom.

Crossing lines Court upholds the "right" of a transgendered teacher to use women's restroom.


For those who aren't familiar with crossdressing, it is a fetish and entering women's private domains (restrooms, gym dressing areas) provides sexual gratification (voyeurism). The public is not being educated on this and as a matter of fact, most of those writing this legislation are ignorant about the issue of transgenderism and are too afraid to oppose legislation which will likely result in harassment from the transgendered and gay communities. Women/girls are assaulted, raped and sometimes killed in public restrooms by male assailants because these places provide out-of-the-way access to vulnerable females. If this bill passes, women/girls will be forced to share women's restrooms with heterosexual men dressed as women in public, at work, school, gyms etc. Women/girls are often at their most vulnerable in restrooms and many sexual predators know this.


Once the cat is out of the bag, it's impossible to put it back. I think the transgendered should be able to find jobs but I don't think their sexual gratification should come at the expense of the safety and privacy of the public including children. Separate restrooms/gym facilities should be required before this legislation is passed.