GUARD Act Guaranteeing Unalienable and Anatomical Rights for Dependents Act
Impact
If enacted, HB6258 could significantly impact state laws concerning parental rights and child welfare regulations. States that enact policies aligning with the bill may find themselves in a position to protect parents who contest gender-related medical treatments suggested for their children. Conversely, states that support such medical interventions could risk losing federal funding, thereby placing their child welfare funding at stake and prompting difficult decisions on how to navigate child protection statutes and parental rights.
Summary
House Bill 6258, known as the 'Guaranteeing Unalienable and Anatomical Rights for Dependents Act' (GUARD Act), seeks to amend the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act. The bill aims to disqualify any state from receiving federal funding if it discriminates against parents or guardians who oppose certain medical, surgical, or psychological treatments related to gender identity that are inconsistent with a minor's biological sex. This move stems from a growing national debate about parental rights and the treatment of minors regarding gender identity issues.
Contention
The bill has elicited controversy due to its potential implications on the rights of parents versus the rights of minors who seek gender affirmative care. Supporters argue that the bill reinforces parental rights and prevents the state from overstepping into family matters. Critics, however, contend that the bill undermines the ability of healthcare professionals to provide necessary care based on established medical guidelines and could harm vulnerable youth who may need access to affirming medical interventions. This friction illustrates the complex landscape of health care, children’s rights, and family governance in the context of gender identity.
Equality Act This bill prohibits discrimination based on sex, sexual orientation, or gender identity with respect to businesses, employment, housing, federally funded programs, and other settings. Specifically, the bill expands Title II and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to prohibit public accommodations and federally funded programs, respectively, from discriminating based on sex, sexual orientation, or gender identity. It also includes stores, transit services, recreational facilities, and establishments that provide health care, accounting, or legal services as public accommodations under Title II. The bill also expands Title IV (desegregation of public schools) and Title VII (employment discrimination) to specifically include sexual orientation and gender identity. (The Supreme Court held in Bostock v. Clayton County that Title VII's prohibition of employment discrimination based on sex also prohibits employment discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity.) The bill similarly expands the Fair Housing Act (discrimination in public and private housing) to include sexual orientation and gender identity. It also prohibits discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity by creditors and with respect to jury selection. The bill defines sex for purposes of the aforementioned provisions to include sex stereotypes, pregnancy, childbirth, sexual orientation, gender identity, and sex characteristics.