Referred to the House Committee on Education and Workforce.
This bill (Keep Our Girls Safe Act of 2025) amends Title IX compliance to require that locker room use in education programs be limited to individuals whose sex is determined solely by reproductive biology and genetics at birth. It makes it unlawful under Title IX for an individual whose birth sex differs from the room's occupants to use that locker room when it is in active use by members of the other birth sex.
Progressives emphasize discrimination and harm to transgender students
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill sets a clear substantive rule (limiting locker room use under Title IX to sex as determined at birth) but is concise to the point of omitting many implementation-relevant specifics.
This bill (Keep Our Girls Safe Act of 2025) amends Title IX compliance to require that locker room use in education programs be limited to individuals whose sex is determined solely by reproductive biology and genetics at birth.
It makes it unlawful under Title IX for an individual whose birth sex differs from the room's occupants to use that locker room when it is in active use by members of the other birth sex.
The law would take effect 30 days after enactment.
Very controversial despite narrow scope; legal risks and lack of compromise features greatly reduce legislative prospects.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill sets a clear substantive rule (limiting locker room use under Title IX to sex as determined at birth) but is concise to the point of omitting many implementation-relevant specifics.
Progressives emphasize discrimination and harm to transgender students
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Progressives emphasize discrimination and harm to transgender students
Likely to view the bill as discriminatory toward transgender students and inconsistent with inclusive civil-rights protections.
Concern will focus on harms to transgender youth, potential exclusion, and conflict with evolving Title IX interpretations and anti-discrimination norms.
Mixed reaction: recognizes legitimate privacy concerns for students, but worries about legal clarity, administrative burden, and potential unintended exclusion.
Would prefer narrowly tailored solutions, clear guidance, and funding for implementation to avoid litigation.
Likely to view the bill favorably as protecting sex-separated spaces and girls' privacy by defining sex based on reproductive biology at birth.
Sees the measure as restoring a clear, enforceable standard for Title IX compliance.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Very controversial despite narrow scope; legal risks and lack of compromise features greatly reduce legislative prospects.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Progressives emphasize discrimination and harm to transgender students
Very controversial despite narrow scope; legal risks and lack of compromise features greatly reduce legislative prospects.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill sets a clear substantive rule (limiting locker room use under Title IX to sex as determined at birth) but is concise to the point of omitting many implementation-rele…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.