2023 LAWS
“GENDER AFFIRMING CARE KIDNAPPING” SB 254
-
The state of Florida may take custody of a child “because the child has been subjected to … sex-reassignment prescriptions or procedures”
“ANTI DRAG BILL” SB 1438
-
DeSantis has railed against drag events that admit children and attempted to strip venues that host them of their liquor licenses, even as his own state agents reported no lewd conduct at one of the events he criticized.
-
“Adult live performance” means any show, exhibition, or 98 other presentations in front of a live audience which, in whole 99 or in part, depicts or simulates nudity, sexual conduct, sexual 100 excitement, or specific sexual activities as those terms are 101 defined in s. 847.001, lewd conduct, or the lewd exposure of 102 prosthetic or imitation genitals or breasts when it:
-
Predominantly appeals to a prurient, shameful, or morbid interest;
-
Is patently offensive to prevailing standards in the adult community of this state as a whole with respect to what is suitable material or conduct for the age of the child present; and
-
Taken as a whole, is without serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value for the age of the child present.”
-
-
“The division may fine, suspend, or revoke the license of any public lodging establishment or public food service establishment if the establishment admits a child to an adult live performance”
-
“The division may issue a $5,000 fine for an establishment’s first violation”
-
“A $10,000 fine for an establishment’s second violation”
-
Knowingly bringing a child to said show will “constitute a misdemeanor of the first degree”
“DON’T SAY GAY BILL 2.0” HB 1069
-
Expanded the “Don’t Say Gay” bill from kindergarten through 3 to kindergarten through 8, but actually affects k-12
-
“Prohibits employees, contractors, and students… from being required to use, from providing, and from being asked to provide pronouns” that do not correspond to that person’s sex
-
BONUS, this is just hypocrisy: “It shall be the policy of every public K-12 educational institution that is provided or authorized by the Constitution and laws of Florida that a person's sex is an immutable biological trait and that it is false to ascribe to a person a pronoun that does not correspond to such person's sex. This section does not apply to individuals born with a genetically or biochemically verifiable disorder of sex development, including, but not limited to, 46, XX disorder of sex development; 46, XY disorder of sex development; sex chromosome disorder of sex development; XX or XY sex reversal; and ovotesticular disorder.
-
-
Bans educational materials, posters, books
-
“Teach abstinence from sexual activity outside of marriage as the expected standard for all school-age students while teaching the benefits of monogamous heterosexual marriage."
6 WEEK ABORTION BAN” SB 300
-
Reduced the abortion limit from 15 weeks to 6 weeks
-
The legislation will upend Florida’s status as an abortion haven in the south, cutting off
access for thousands who would otherwise travel from neighboring states each year forthe procedure-
BONUS, nonsensical exemption: “The pregnancy is the result of rape, incest, or
human trafficking and the gestational age of the fetus is not more than 15 weeks
as determined by the physician. At the time the woman schedules or arrives for
her appointment to obtain the abortion, she must provide a copy of a restraining
order, police report, medical record, or other court order or documentation
providing evidence that she is obtaining the termination of pregnancy because she
is a victim of rape, incest, or human trafficking."
-
-
“A physician may not use telehealth … to perform an abortion, including, but not limited to, medical abortions. Any medications intended for use in a medical abortion must be dispensed in person by a physician and may not be dispensed through the United States Postal Service or by any other courier or shipping service.”
“RELIGIOUS DISCRIMINATION” SB 1580
-
This bill is a broad license for health care providers and insurance companies to refuse services to people based on “conscience-based objection” means an objection based on a sincerely held religious, moral, or ethical belief.
-
BONUS: Republicans voted against amendments to include gender identity and sexuality protections.
THE BILL
THE BILL
2022
2022
Florida’s “Don’t Say Gay” bill was recently signed into law by Govenor Ron DeSantis. The new legislation is purposefully vague and unclear, and has potentially far-reaching implications for all of Florida’s children. Ultimately, this act aims to silence and stigmatize students trying to discover their identity during their formative years, and to punish schools and teachers that do not abide by its inequitable standards.
Here, we break down the real meaning behind key passages of Florida’s “Don’t Say Gay” bill.
Read the bill’s full text here:
Classroom discussions about sexual orientation and gender identity are prohibited for grades K-3, and must be “age appropriate” for all other grades.
Parents can sue a school for violating any provisions of this law, and the district would have to cover the legal fees.
Parents must be notified if their student seeks out or uses any of the school’s counseling or health services.
Florida’s Department of Education will rewrite the state’s school counseling standards within the parameters of the “Don’t Say Gay” act.
Parents can opt their children out of receiving any physical or mental health services provided by their school.
2022 - Let's dive right in.
Discussing sexuality and gender identity is prohibited for grades K-3, and must be “age appropriate” for all other grades.
Lines 97-101
TRANSLATION: Talking about sexual orientation and gender identity is banned in the classroom for grades K-3, and is restricted based on “age appropriateness” for all other grade levels.
IMPLICATIONS: This provision is the “Don’t Say Gay” bill’s main point of contention. The law prohibits and restricts “classroom instruction” of sexual orientation and gender identity; however, it is vague in its use of the term “classroom instruction.” Is the scope of “instruction” restricted to sexual health education? Does it extend to history books that cover the legalization of same-sex marriage? What about a children’s book that features gay parents?
Although the law’s text does not offer a definition, the bill’s preamble guides the reader toward its clear intent in “prohibiting classroom discussion about sexual orientation or gender identity in certain grade levels or in a specified manner” (lines 21-23). Here, the text goes so far as to prohibit not just “instruction,” but “discussion” of sexual and gender identity. Under this lens of statutory interpretation, would a student that identifies as trans be able to show up to class as their authentic self?
For students in all other grades, it does not specify what is considered “age appropriate” or “developmentally appropriate” when talking about sexual and gender identity. Is it “age appropriate” for a middle school history teacher to teach a lesson on the HIV/AIDS epidemic? Or for a high school literature teacher to assign readings by James Baldwin?
Given this provision’s implications, it’s clear that the Florida legislature is perfectly fine facilitating the erasure and stigmatization of the LGBTQ+ community.
Parents must be notified if their student uses any counseling or health services.
TRANSLATION: Parents must be notified if their student seeks out or uses any of the school’s counseling or health services, or if there’s been a perceived change in the student’s mental, emotional, or physical well-being.
IMPLICATIONS: The notification rule seems to apply to students in all grades, regardless of the circumstances. They could be using the school’s health services for anxiety, depression, questions about their sexuality, or just a runny nose.
From the an LGBTQ+ perspective, if a student of any age questioning their sexual orientation or gender identity seeks counseling services, the counselor would be required to notify their parent. Presumably, this includes circumstances where the student requests confidentiality, which could be for a myriad of reasons. For instance, perhaps the student has questions about gender expression, but knows their parents are not accepting of transgender and nonbinary individuals. Counselors are often faced with scenarios like this, and must balance a fine line between respecting a student’s request for privacy and the obligation to keep their parents in the know. The “Don’t Say Gay” law ignores such nuances, and could ultimately erode students’ trust in counselors and the school system.
The only way school personnel would not have to disclose information to parents is “if a reasonably prudent person would believe that disclosure would result in abuse, abandonment, or neglect” (lines 93-95). This puts counselors and teachers in a precarious situation where they are forced to discern if certain information would cause a parent to harm a child, or else face punitive enforcement of the law.
Lines 67-73
Lines 91-95
Lines 106-109
Parents can prohibit a school from providing counseling or health services to their child.
TRANSLATION: Schools must give parents the chance to opt-out of counseling and health services for their student.
IMPLICATIONS: Again, this opt-out provision seems to apply to students in all grades. When analyzing this through the lens of LGBTQ+ issues, some parents may choose to opt-out exactly because their child has questions about their sexual orientation or gender identity, and do not want a counselor validating those questions.
Grades K-12 are some of the most formative years of a person’s life. One’s childhood and teenage years lay the foundation for their personality and character moving forward, and heavily influence their worldview. For many, it’s a time when much support, nurturing and understanding is needed, particularly regarding questions of identity. Denying a student such critical services on the basis of bigotry is unacceptable.
Parents can sue a school for violating the law, and the district will be forced to cover the legal fees.
TRANSLATION: Schools must create a system for intaking and reviewing parents’ concerns regarding violations of the “Don’t Say Gay” law. If the concern is not resolved by the school district, then a parent can sue the school and the district will be required to cover the legal costs.
IMPLICATIONS: Schools already faced with administrative backlog will now have to create a system for addressing complaints specifically in reference to this law. If a parent feels their complaint was not properly resolved, they can take it to court.
The bill’s vague language leaves much room for judicial interpretation, making it quite possible that a parent could obtain a judgement against a school. Faced with the threat of expensive litigation, schools may preemptively change lesson plans, cancel events or remove certain books from the classroom. The state’s quality of education will certainly suffer if teachers have a legitimate fear of being sued over covering the wrong topic or just saying the wrong thing.
Lines 119-123
Lines 129-130
146-151
Florida’s Department of Education will rewrite school counseling standards within the parameters of the “Don’t Say Gay” law.
Lines 157-162
TRANSLATION: By June 2023, Florida’s Department of Education will rewrite the state’s school counseling standards within the framework of the “Don’t Say Gay” law.
IMPLICATIONS: Florida’s current school counseling framework promotes acceptance of diversity and equal access to counseling services for all students. In the preamble of its “Ethical Standards for School Counselors,” it asserts:
“Each person has the right to be respected, be treated with dignity and have access to a comprehensive school counseling program that advocates for and affirms all students from diverse populations regardless of ethnic/racial status, age, economic status, special needs, English as a second language or other language group, immigration status, sexual orientation, gender, gender identity/expression, family type, religious/spiritual identity and appearance.”
The abovementioned provision of the “Don’t Say Gay” bill threatens the current framework’s affirming language, and calls for counseling standards to be updated within the parameters of the new law. Given its murky meaning and bigoted undertones, one must question the validity of any counseling standards that are created using the “Don’t Say Gay” act as its guardrails.
Grades K-12 are some of the most formative years of a person’s life. One’s childhood and teenage years lay the foundation for their personality and character moving forward, and heavily influence their worldview. For many, it’s a time when much support, nurturing and understanding is needed, particularly regarding questions of identity. Denying a student such critical services on the basis of bigotry is unacceptable.
In Arizona, proposed bills by Republican state senators include those that would block gender-affirming healthcare for transgender youth, as well as force teachers, nurses and other school staff to disclose a minor’s gender identity to their parents.
A bill introduced by Tennessee state Republicans in February seeks to prohibit any instructional materials that “promote, normalize, support, or address lesbian, gay, bi-sexual, or transgender issues or lifestyles”.
In Indiana, state legislators proposed a bill that would require schools to “obtain prior informed written consent from the parent of a student who is less than eighteen years of age… before the student may participate in any instruction on human sexuality.”
South Carolina bill seeks to prevent teachers, staff members and district employees from engaging in gender and sexual diversity training.
Ohio Republican representatives Jean Schmidt and Mike Loychik introduced a bill that would ban kindergarten through third-grade classrooms from discussing sexual orientation and gender identity. Additionally, classrooms with older students would be disallowed from featuring those topics in ways that are “not age-appropriate or developmentally appropriate”
Oklahoma state legislators recently passed a bill that prevents students enrolled in colleges from being “required to engage in any form of mandatory gender or sexual diversity training or counseling; provided, voluntary counseling shall not be prohibited”. The law also states, “Any orientation or requirement that presents any form of race or sex stereotyping or a bias on the basis of race or sex shall be prohibited.”