Gettin’ busy in Frankfort: anti-LGBTQ bills moving through Kentucky state legislature
photo: Jon Cherry for Queer Kentucky. Drag queen May O’Nays speaks at the fairness rally on February 18 in Frankfort.
A national kerfuffle over whether or not a bill is a threat, the moves to ban drag, and national think tanks influencing Kentucky state policy… oh my! Updates on HB 747, HB 5, SB 6, and SB 147:
New anti-LGBTQ+ bill that flew under the radar? Not quite.
Kentucky received national media attention for a bill (HB 747) that could take custody of trans kids if they violate a controversial school bathroom policy. This bill was covered as being the means to enforce the policy of SB 150, which aims to regulate transness and gender non-conformity in schools by requiring school districts to form disruptive bathroom policies based on biological sex.
While SB 150 still exists and disrupts the comfortability and safety of students, parents, teachers, and administration, it seems that this year’s bill, HB 747, is not intended to further enforce SB 150.
For additional background on the bill: HB 747, “AN ACT relating to educational neglect,” was covered as being able to take trans kids away from their parents if the child violates the anti-trans bathroom law passed last year in Kentucky – SB 150. The alarm bells were sounded on social media by legislative researcher and activist Allison Chapman, who resides in Virginia.
Allison Chapman (@AlliRaine22) tweeted with photos of the bill’s language,
“Kentucky has introduced a bill that would REMOVE TRANS KIDS from their home if they don’t follow the state’s school bathroom ban and charge their parents with NEGLECT.
This builds upon a bill passed last year that requires schools to ban trans students from bathrooms.”
HB 747 does not mention trans kids, gender, or bathrooms, so it was framed as having flown under the radar and requiring background knowledge. While initially appearing like a sneak attack on trans kids, leading LGBTQ+ activists in the state are clarifying that this may have been a misinterpretation of the bill’s intent and impact.
The bill is sponsored by Representative Jason Petrie (R), who is Chairman of the House Appropriations and Revenue Committee. Chris Hartman (he/him), Executive Director of the Fairness Campaign, provided this statement on HB 747,
“I had a good conversation with Chairman Petrie this morning. He confirmed in no way is the bill intended to target trans kids or their parents. He shared that if there were a legal analysis that determined it could be applied in that way, he would work with us to tighten the language of the bill up. Chairman Petrie has always been forthright with us and willing to collaborate as much as possible. We have also run the bill past several education experts and attorneys, all of whom did not have immediate red flags around its interpretation for trans children and their parents. We will continue to monitor the bill and its progress, and we will do our best to ensure that it and others do not unintentionally harm transgender children or their families.”
The bill amends KRS 600.020 to amend the definition of “abused and neglected child” to describe educational neglect. The child is deemed neglected if a parent or guardian does not provide certain things like adequate care, supervision, and food. This amendment would include education, “which shall include a parent’s failure to properly supervise, instruct, train, or control his or her child and that failure is a substantial contributing factor to the child’s violation of the school board’s code of acceptable behavior and discipline adopted under KRS Chapter 158…”
The nationally infamous law from Kentucky’s last legislative session, SB 150, was an omnibus anti-trans bill combining multiple anti-LGBTQ+ laws from the 2023 legislative session. As Angela Cooper wrote in this ACLU Press Release on SB 150’s passage,
“The bill, which contains many of the original provisions of HB 470, was rushed to the House floor after a hasty committee hearing where trans Kentuckians begged and pleaded for their lives, and access to critical care for trans youth. SB 150 encompasses a host of new laws that are among the most extreme anti-trans attacks in the United States.”
SB 150 bans trans students from using bathrooms and locker rooms that do not align with their perceived biological sex, and it also promotes censorship around LGBTQ+ topics and identities in schools and bans doctors from providing gender-affirming care for trans youth. SB 150 was opposed by the American Medical Association, the American Psychological Association, the American Academy of Pediatrics, the Human Rights Commission, and 71 percent of Kentuckians.
Originally, people whose concern grew from Chapman’s tweet about HB 747 were under the impression that this amendment was a way to enforce SB 150. This perceived enforcement would take the burden off of schools and put it onto parents, with the threat that the state would take their kids for “educational neglect” if their child used the “wrong” restroom.
This was thought to look like a trans boy using the boy’s bathroom at school as a form of parental neglect because the parents were unable to “control” their child. However, according to Hartman’s statement on education experts and attorneys, this bill is not a threat to families with trans children and it was not intended to be.
This said, with another year of record beating numbers of anti-LGBTQ+ bills filed in Kentucky and the nation, the assumption of best intent is not something many queer people and parents of queer youth can afford. After all, last legislative session, Chairman Petrie voted in favor of SB 150. The bill was a sweeping piece of legislation with impacts that are unfolding more and more as it is enforced, and Kentucky’s queer community is critical of trusting the intended impact of bills – especially when they are so hastily passed.
HB 747 will be heard by the House Appropriations and Revenue Committee, and Rep. Petrie, the bill sponsor, is again the chair of the committee. We will make updates if the interpretation of this amendment shifts.
Dubbed the “Suffer Kentucky Act” by the bill’s opposition, HB 5 is a controversial crime bill that would impact state law on violent offenses, homelessness, and drug charges.
The bill had strong support from police presence, which is not surprising given that it is a crime bill that expands criminalization. Ryan Straw, vice president and governmental affairs chair of the police union, said in committee that the bill can help with keeping police officers across the state. He said this would make Kentucky “a destination for law enforcement,” which is concerning for those weary about police and their state-sponsored capacity to expand violence.
Meanwhile, opponents of the bill spoke of its $1 billion dollar enforcement price tag, the increasing criminalization of Kentuckians, and the morality of enforcing such a bill.
Queer Kentuckians are impacted by this bill due to homelessness and housing instability, as well as substance abuse being more prominent in the LGBTQ+ community, due to “social stigma,” “discrimination,” “harassment,” “violence,” and “other stressors.”
HB 5 won passage in the Senate Judiciary Committee. Two Democrats voted no on the bill – Sens. Gerald Neal and Karen Berg. A Republican, Sen. Whitney Westerfield, was the third vote of opposition. Next, the bill goes to the Senate floor. The bill will need to be voted on again by the House before the bill could go to the governor’s desk and be signed into law.
Democrats have criticized this bill for not being backed up with research. Upon public request for more information around the source of this bill, a Kentucky Public Radio analysis found that many of the sources provided as support for this bill are actually from a policy report in Georgia, not Kentucky constituents, policy writers, or community members.
As originally reported by Sylvia Goodman with Louisville Public Radio, the author of the policy report is Josh Crawford, who was the executive director of the Pegasus Institute. This was a millennial-run conservative think tank in Louisville that seems to no longer be active. While denying involvement in this bill’s drafting, he does currently serve as the criminal policy director for the Georgia Center for Opportunity – a member of the State Policy network, which connects statewide conservative and libertarian think tanks across the country. This bill was copy and pasted from a policy paper from another state, and it has broad effects on Kentuckians’ safety, spending, and freedoms.
Dubbed an anti-DEI bill that is college level, SB 6 would ban race-based scholarships and being able to require DEI training or classes, while also defunding DEI offices and initiatives.
Passed out of the committee, the House’s version of SB 6 is a condensed version of Rep. Decker’s HB 9, another anti-DEI bill in the legislature.
The highly contentious legislation had rich committee remarks, with conservative think tanks Heritage Foundation and the Manhattan Institute speaking in favor of the bill. Over a dozen opponents also spoke against the bill, with people from Louisville Urban League and the Kentucky Council on Postsecondary Education giving remarks on the harmful effects of the bill.
Dubbed the anti-drag bill, SB 147 would categorize all drag performances as strictly “adult oriented” and limit performances near schools or other public places where children could be. The conversation surrounding the support of this bill is around the idea that drag shows “sexualize” or “groom” children.
This opposition to drag shows (both in Kentucky and nationwide) has been framed as protecting children, which has been named a homophobic trope rooted in anti-LGBTQ+ panic. The idea that drag queens and the LGBTQ+ community are grooming/ harming young children is not only unsubstantiated, but causing “immense harm” to the LGBTQ+ community.
This bill mirrors other bills that have been passed in states like Florida, Montana, Tennessee, and Texas. Each of these bills were deemed unenforceable due to repeated concern for First Amendment rights, from both sides of the aisle.
The Montana bill passed was banned from being enforced on First Amendment rights concerns, and the federal judge who enforced the block wrote that the law would, “disproportionately harm not only drag performers, but any person who falls outside traditional gender and identity norms.” As with other bills deemed by federal judges as sweeping and extreme, the Montana bill “encourage[d] arbitrary and discriminatory enforcement.”
So, this bill directly impacts drag performers, businesses that work with drag performers, and trans and gender non-conforming people who would suffer from a codified gender binary under this drag ban.
The bill passed the Senate on March 6th and will head to the House next.
This story is part of a series from Queer Kentucky focused on following the 2024 Kentucky General Assembly from a queer lens. Follow Queer Kentucky on your favorite social media platform to stay up-to-date with our GA24 coverage.