Washington State Reps Band Together To Write Controversial HB 1011

I am far from a lawyer, but it seems that Washington state is mixing some things up in a new HB 1101 Bill proposed by representatives Taylor, Shea, McCaslin, Young, Klippert, Walsh, Haler, Short, Manweller, Hargrove, Pike, Holy, Rodne, and Buys. 

In the bill, subtitled Allowing The Use Of Gender-Segregated Facilities, it seems that everyone is protected within the new proposal.

(1) The right to be free from discrimination because of race, creed, color, national origin, sex, honorably discharged veteran or military status, sexual orientation, or the presence of any sensory, mental, or physical disability or the use of a trained dog guide or service animal by a person with a disability is recognized as and declared to be a civil right. This right shall include, but not be limited to:

and the bill goes on to mention areas where discrimination cannot happen to individuals in #1, nice things like business, real estate, and credit transactions as well as employment and 

(b) The right to the full enjoyment of any of the accommodations, advantages, facilities, or privileges of any place of public resort, accommodation, assemblage, or amusement;

Sounds good. 

They even take a step in a direction that may cause a little burp (pun intended).

(g) The right of a mother to breastfeed her child in any place of public resort, accommodation, assemblage, or amusement.

I guess I can just look the other way.  Now this is the part I am a little foggy on

(f) The right to engage in commerce free from any discriminatory boycotts or blacklists. Discriminatory boycotts or blacklists for purposes of this section shall be defined as the formation or execution of any express or implied agreement, understanding, policy or contractual arrangement for economic benefit between any persons which is not specifically authorized by the laws of the United States and which is required or imposed, either directly or indirectly, overtly or covertly, by a foreign government or foreign person in order to restrict, condition, prohibit, or interfere with or in order to exclude any person or persons from any business relationship on the basis of race, color, creed, religion, sex, honorably discharged veteran or military status, sexual orientation, the presence of any sensory, mental, or physical disability, or the use of a trained dog guide or service animal by a person with a disability, or national origin or lawful business relationship: PROVIDED HOWEVER, That nothing herein contained shall prohibit the use of boycotts as authorized by law pertaining to labor disputes and unfair labor practices; and

Does this mean that businesses cannot discriminate against anyone from #1.  No more cake wars over gay cakes? That is my interpretation.

What may not need too much interpretation is part four.

(4) Nothing in this chapter prohibits a public or private entity from limiting access to a private facility segregated by gender, such as a bathroom, restroom, toilet, shower, locker room, or sauna, to a person if the person is preoperative, nonoperative, or otherwise has genitalia of a different gender from that for which the facility is segregated. Nothing in this chapter grants any right to a person to access a private facility segregated by gender, such as a bathroom, restroom, toilet, shower, locker room, or sauna, of a public or private entity if the person is preoperative, nonoperative, or otherwise has genitalia of a different gender from that for which the facility is segregated.

 

Part 5 goes on to discuss transgender minor's rights, well, erm, the lack there of just like the adults above.  A clear blockage of transgender students from using desired facilities in schools?

For how he bill appears in its proposal form, head over to lawfilestext for Washington State here.

Is the bill giving us legal protection to shop where we want to without discrimination (part f), but at the same time limiting individuals to restrooms that match their genitals?  You'll be able to stick your breast out in public and feed your child, but if you haven't had lower gender reassignment surgery, you will have to use your "birth certificate bathroom?"

We are hoping that those in Washington do not elect to provide protection and rights for some while taking away the rights of others.

We will have to wait and see how Washington will react to this proposal in January.

 

Leave a Comment