Montana ordered to clarify a ballot on which bathrooms trans people can use
Montana has been ordered by the highest court in the state to clarify the language of a ballot on whether trans people can use gender-appropriate bathrooms.
A ruling was made on Tuesday by the Montana Supreme Court after the ACLU of Montana put forward a legal challenge to the ballot.
The ACLU had accused the state of being too vague on the ballot and excluding to define what is meant by ‘sex’.
And the state’s highest court agreed that the ballot did not specify whether it would only apply to local government buildings and public education facilities.
The court also noted that the ballot did not specify how much it would cost local government and education authorities to comply with the law if enacted.
In addition, the Montana Supreme Court also stated that the language did not go far enough to protect against legal action by anbody claiming “emotional or mental distress” if they come across a trans person.
In a statement issued on the language, Caitlin Borgmann said that the ballot, if passed, would “banish transgender Montanans from full and equal participation in public life.”
The measure has been compared to the semi-repealed HB2 measure in North Carolina which banned trans people from using gender-appropriate public restrooms.
The ballot in Montana has been put forward by the Montana Family Foundation, which has until June to gather 26,000 signatures for it to go on a November 2018 ballot.
Legislators in the state had rejected a referendum on the issue this year.
Jeff Lazloffy, the president of the Foundation has said he is unhappy with the decision, and claimed the issues raised by the lawsuit were “fairly minor”.
“We need to come up with a solution that works for everyone, or for the greatest number of people,” Lazloffy said.
He added that the organisation is confident it can get the signatures required, and that it will pass at the ballot.
“The Supreme Court has ensured that when all Montanans vote on (the initiative) and decide whether or not to legalize discrimination, they will be informed about the societal and economic costs for regulations that target our transgender friends and neighbors,” Alex Rate, the ACLU legal director said.
North Carolina’s measure to partially repeal HB2 was officially called House Bill 142.
After increasing pressure from businesses and campaigners, HB 142 was passed and prohibited local authorities from regulating multi-occupancy toilets, showers or changing facilities, leaving it up to the state.
The fact that local authorities are barred from making anti-LGBT discrimination illegal until 2020 prompted an outpouring of anger from many prominent LGBT activists, with Equality NC executive director Chris Sgro calling it a “fake repeal”.
NC Governor Cooper, who ran for election on a platform of repealing HB2, said: “It’s not a perfect deal, but it repeals HB2 and begins to repair our reputation.”
In a joint statement, Majority Republican leaders Tim Moore and Phil Berger said at the time HB 142 was passed: “Compromise requires give and take from all sides, and we are pleased this proposal fully protects bathroom safety and privacy.”
Human Rights Campaign president Chad Griffin said the repeal bill was a “disaster” which only “doubles down on discrimination” of LGBT people in the state.
“All lawmakers, D and R, must reject #HB2 ‘deal,’ he wrote on Twitter. “Stand strong with the LGBTQ community. We will be watching who leads & who sells us out.”