COLUMBUS, Ohio — The Ohio House passed a bill that would take away trans youth’s rights to health care and athletics.
In a 64-28 vote, the Republicans voted to pass anti-transgender bills during Pride Month.
Gender-affirming care
House Bill 68 would prohibit gender-affirming care for trans and nonbinary youth, including hormone blockers, hormone replacement therapy (HRT), medical or surgical procedures and some mental health services.
Healthcare professionals who provide this care could lose their licenses and be sued. Medicaid would not cover gender-affirming procedures for minors.
H.B. 68 was introduced by state Rep. Gary Click (R-Vickery). Lawmakers in favor of the bill argue that trans teens don’t know what they really want, and their parents and doctors are pressured to approve of this healthcare.
“Parents are being manipulated by the physicians,” Click said.
Click, who is not a doctor and attended an unaccredited university where he majored in religious studies, said he has done hours of research.
That research, though, has been called into question by experts, and it consists of testimonies from detransitioners, disgruntled parents (some of whom have lost custody of or are in no-contact with their trans children), YouTube videos and articles from the 1980s that have been debunked or more recent pieces that have been widely criticized for being transphobic.
"It would have a severe health impact on a lot of trans children and non-binary children in the state who are already receiving life-saving medicine, who would then be forcefully removed from the existing medications that have worked for them," said Maria Bruno with Equality Ohio. "Passing this bill would take away the parental rights of these parents to decide the best course of action for their children."
The bill does more than just ban healthcare; it also prevents trans kids from participating in athletics.
Athletics
Along with requiring schools, state institutions of higher education and private colleges to designate separate single-sex teams and sports for each sex, H.B. 68 provides the opportunity for legal action.
Anyone who feels they didn't get an athletic opportunity or "suffers a direct or indirect harm" can sue the school and district, interscholastic conference or organization that regulates the conference. If someone feels they have been retaliated against for reporting a potential "trans" student, they are also able to sue. The individual must bring the suit within two years after the "violation" occurs.
The bill mainly focuses on trans girls but also applies to male teams.
Six girls across Ohio may no longer be able to play on their sports teams if Republicans in the state get their way. Only three were approved to play for the spring sports season.
There are approximately 400,000 athletes participating in 7-12 athletics in the state, according to Ohio High School Athletic Association. They represent 0.000015% of the population. For the spring season, she and the two others represent 0.0000075%.
Parker is a college athlete, and he would get kicked off his team if he participated in Ohio.
"My team accepts me; my college team does," Parker said. "But apparently, our state doesn't."
RELATED: Six transgender girls play sports in Ohio, but GOP wants them out
But for Matt Sharp, with the conservative group Alliance Defending Freedom — trans athletes could take awards from cisgender athletes.
"It only takes one male to capture a championship, one male to take a record that belonged to them," Sharp said.
Currently, if a trans girl in middle or high school wants to play with cis girls, she must have either a minimum of one year of going through hormone treatment or she must demonstrate no physical or physiological advantages.
What is next?
The bill goes to the Senate.
Senate President Matt Huffman (R-Lima) is in favor of the sports ban aspect but didn't touch on the healthcare portion.
A federal judge in Arkansas just ruled that the state's ban on gender-affirming care was discriminatory and blocked it. When asked how that may impact his decision-making process, Huffman said it wouldn't.
"It's been a problem in the United States that a single appointed federal judge, not accountable to the voters, passes a law... regarding state law when probably they don't have real jurisdiction to do that," Huffman said. "I don't think... what one judge on the federal bench in Arkansas thinks is going to affect what the Ohio General Assembly does."
That is funny, Senate Minority Leader Nickie Antonio (D-Lakewood) said.
"I find that really interesting, considering that right now we have gerrymandered districts that were decided by a federal judge," Antonio said. "Irony always rears its ugly head in the state of Ohio."
Follow WEWS statehouse reporter Morgan Trau on Twitter and Facebook.
