Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
This bill adds a new statutory chapter to Title 1 of the U.S. Code that defines terms such as 'male', 'female', 'man', 'woman', 'boy', 'girl', 'father', 'mother', 'sex', and 'gender identity' for the purpose of interpreting any federal law, rule, or agency action.
It defines 'male' and 'female' as the biological sex a person 'belongs, at conception,' based on reproductive functions (sperm or eggs) and declares sex an immutable biological classification.
The bill states that 'gender identity' is an internal, subjective sense and 'shall not be recognized by the Federal Government as a replacement for sex.'
Highly contentious subject with broad federal reach, weak compromise features, and substantial legal and political resistance make enactment unlikely absent major modifications.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a clearly worded statutory definitional amendment that would change interpretive rules across federal law. It is explicit about the definitions themselves and the intended scope of application but sparse on implementation detail, interaction with existing statutory schemes, handling of edge cases, and oversight.
Progressives emphasize discrimination and civil-rights harms.
Progressives emphasize discrimination and civil-rights harms.
Likely strongly opposed; views definitions as exclusionary and discriminatory toward transgender and nonbinary people.
Sees the bill as removing federal recognition of gender identity and undermining legal protections and access to services.
Mixed reaction; appreciates demand for definitional clarity but worries about rigidity, implementation conflicts, and litigation.
Would seek targeted fixes, clearer medical standards, and transitional provisions.
Generally supportive; sees the bill as restoring biological definitions, protecting sex-based rights, and preventing gender identity from supplanting sex in federal law.
Views as necessary to preserve fairness in women’s programs and safety in single-sex facilities.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Highly contentious subject with broad federal reach, weak compromise features, and substantial legal and political resistance make enactment unlikely absent major modifications.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Progressives emphasize discrimination and civil-rights harms.
Highly contentious subject with broad federal reach, weak compromise features, and substantial legal and political resistance make enactmen…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a clearly worded statutory definitional amendment that would change interpretive rules across federal law. It is explicit about the definitions themselves and the…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.