As Tennessee State Senators came to the floor on Monday afternoon, about two dozen activists formed a wall in the hallway, singing to the lawmakers.
“Whether you’re cisgender
“Whether you’re trans
“Equal protection is the law of this land”
The group, led by the Tennessee Equality Project (TEP), was there to protest Senate Bill 676, a proposed state law that will likely require doctors to report on transgender related healthcare, ahead of its near-final vote.
Tensions have been high around a series of anti-LGBTQIA bills proposed this year. Activists have opposed the tracking bill throughout the session claiming that the policy would effectively “dox’ transgender or other non-cisgender people even though the data reported to the state legislature by the bill would be in aggregate, not tied to individuals. Ahead of the House vote in March, activist Heather May was physically removed from the Capitol by state troopers.
Dahron Annelise Johnson, co-chair of the Nashville Committee of TEP, said the bill was “inherently problematic” even if individual details are not tracked by the state.
“This is a bill that gathers data on trans and gender diverse patients throughout the state, as well as providers,” Johnson said ahead of the meeting. “It asks for details around prescriptions, around what’s discussed in medical visits, around how long somebody has been in treatment or has been having gender care discussions with their providers.”
Among privacy concerns, Johnson is critical of the bill for singling out non-cisgender patients, though many cisgender patients also receive some of the same healthcare treatments, including taking hormone supplements like testosterone and estrogen for different conditions.
To specifically target transgender patients, the bill is written to require health care providers and insurers to track gender transition and detransition treatments “including mental health treatment, medical interventions, and surgeries that stop, reverse, or help an individual cope with the effects of a gender transition procedure due to the resolution of any inconsistency between the individual’s sex and the individual’s perceived sex or perceived gender.”
“All of that is a prognostication about what medical decision someone might make in the future,” Johnson said. “So do we collect data on everybody who’s taking hormones?”
Sponsors Sen. Brent Taylor (R-Memphis) and Rep. Jeremy Faison (R-Cosby) say the bill is intended to provide public transparency into the number of trans patients who choose to detransition, to address unfair “one-way transitioning,” and ensure patients can receive care if they choose to detransition.
“What about the poor folks that took up this transition nonsense and they transitioned to a sex or a gender that they thought would solve their problem, and they just want to be left alone? They want to be able to go back to their birth gender,” Taylor said. “Why the party that is always for universal healthcare and for choice — they’re for choice but only one way.”
“I just find that curious,” he added.
After more than half an hour of debate, the Senate passed the bill 24 to 7, with every Democrat and Sen. John Stevens (R-Huntington) voting against.
They also added a pair of amendments to allow the attorney general to investigate those who do not comply and to remove county-level data from the required report. Taylor said his amendment removing county data was inspired by a conversation with protesters who raised concerns about individual HIPAA rights if there are a limited number of transgender individuals in a lower-population county.
“(The amendment) just says that we will not report in the public-facing website the county in which someone transitions or detransitions,” Taylor said, noting that Faison had agreed to the change. In order for the bill to pass, the House will have to take a second floor vote to reconcile the disparate versions of the bill.
Protesters said ahead of the meeting that the amendment was a small victory, but that the bill is still part of an effort to intimidate the trans community and inch toward more restrictive policies in future sessions.
Despite the apparent olive branch, Taylor also somewhat admonished protesters.
“Those who protest our bills, I think would do better if they would engage with us and talk with us about what their concerns are rather than immediately screaming at us when we walk in the chamber, calling us fascists,” Taylor said.
Democrats, including Sen. Raumesh Akbari (D-Memphis), criticized the bill, mentioning privacy concerns but also a provision of the bill that prohibits localities from banning conversion therapy.
“It is unfair for us to legislate in a way that allows or bans the banning of behavior or treatment that could be harmful to someone,” Akbari said. “There is ample evidence on the dangers of conversion therapy. … There are dangers in forcing these young people to go into these programs.”
Akbari acknowledged her argument was an uphill battle following a U.S. Supreme Court decision earlier this month, which ruled states cannot ban conversion therapy, because it violates the First Amendment.
Still, she argued that the state should not pass any policy that could push a vulnerable person to self-harm as they work through their gender identity.
“This is not just a vanity decision, but instead it is life-affirming care,” Akbari said.
___
This story was originally published by the and distributed through a partnership with The Associated Press.
