INDIANAPOLIS - With proponents on both sides of Indiana’s LGBT civil rights debate still far apart, lawmakers might leave the issue up to the courts to decide.
Indiana’s Interim Courts and Judiciary Committee heard testimony regarding civil rights for Indiana’s LGBT community for more than two hours on Tuesday. After hearing passionate testimony on both sides of the issue, Committee Chair Rep. Greg Stueurwald, R-Avon, said lawmakers needed to be cognizant of how the court system is dealing with these issues.
“I think each and every one one of these issues is now making its way through federal courts,” Stueurwald said. “We need to be aware of that and see how those cases make progress. No matter what we do, it’s probably going to be preempted.”
Steuerwald said several committee members have expressed to him a desire to wait and see what the courts do before introducing legislation.
Committee member Rep. Tom Washburne, R-Evansville, said legislators are still unsure how best to mesh civil rights with religious freedom in Indiana. Washburne quoted the state constitution’s mandate that the state not pass any law that conflicts with the free exercise of religious opinions or the rights of conscience in Indiana. He said unless both sides can agree on a compromise, legislation in 2017 seems unlikely.
“If you grant civil rights protections, you have to be careful about providing some religious exemptions,” Washburne said. “And where they got stuck in the Senate was, what kind of religious exemptions do you grant? No one’s found a great solution for that.”
The committee heard from several transgender individuals and business leaders advocating for the four words and a comma approach, which would add sexual orientation and gender identity to Indiana’s civil rights code. Lane Bannister, a transgender man, said the transgender community in Indiana feels unloved and unwanted.
The main reason the issue is being studied this summer is because of the mandate from the Obama Administration asking schools to allow students to use restrooms based on their gender identity.
Those who spoke against civil rights Tuesday spent most of their time expressing concerns about the lack of privacy and safety the mandate brings.
Monica Boyer, a mom who has been outspoken against the mandate since it was introduced, said she isn’t concerned about the transgender community. She is concerned the mandate allows anyone to use whatever restroom or locker room they want to.
“There is no medical requirement,” Boyer said. “What teenage boy wouldn’t leap at the chance to shower with teenage girls?”
Others testified the mandate would encourage sexual predators to take advantage of being allowed in opposite sex restrooms.
The transgender individuals who spoke said they had never had an issue using restrooms either before or after their transition.
“Trans people pose no threat,” Korbin Bothwell said. “I’ve been using public restrooms my whole life.”
Sen. Travis Holdman, R-Markle, who authored the failed legislation earlier this year, said he was a little confused on the bathroom focus from LGBT right opponents.
“I’m not sure that that is an issue because transgender folks are using the bathroom of their choice currently,” Holdman said. “I don’t see that as an issue to be honest with you.”
Because of the workload placed on the judiciary committee, this is the only scheduled meeting where LGBT rights will be discussed. The committee will decide later if legislation should be introduced.