The 2017 ‘Bathroom’ bill is here. With a few changes.

The 2017 version of last session’s ‘bathroom bill’ is here with a few changes, most notably, that it really isn’t going after the use of bathroom facilities as much as locker room and shower facilities, where students would be in a state of nudity:

SB115P – 2017 Bathroom Bill by Pat Powers on Scribd

Does this bill stand a better chance of passing (or surviving a veto) as opposed to the prior measure? Or, as opposed to a state mandate, should this be considered an issue better under local control of schools as it has, and the Governor argues?

12 Replies to “The 2017 ‘Bathroom’ bill is here. With a few changes.”

  1. Fred Deutsch

    No mentions of bathrooms in the bill.

    Given the new political reality of a Trump administration that doesn’t require schools to open bathrooms to children of opposite biological sex, I think it’s a good move to allow the locals to control the bathrooms. I support a uniform standard across the state that only biological boys can use the boys showers and changing rooms, and same for the biological girls.

    1. Jaa Dee

      “public school locker rooms,1shower rooms, and changing facilities “– No bathrooms in those places?

      “As interpreted by the Department of Education, Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 forbids discrimination against trans students in any school that receives federal funding. These schools are prohibited from excluding trans students from the bathroom consistent with their gender identity. The new North Carolina law, dubbed H2, rebukes this federal mandate by forbidding public schools from allowing trans students to use the correct bathroom. That jeopardizes the more than $4.5 billion in federal education funding that North Carolina expected to receive in 2016.”— What does $4.5 bil. in N.C. equate to in S. D. ?

      The whine against IM22 was that it was illegal, though it has not been found unConstitutional in the courts———— Now we have the whiners KNOWINGLY passing a bill that has absolutely been found to be illegal— How much has it cost the tax payers in court costs on bills passed by these people that had already been found UnConstitutional.. The real question is how much has it cost the tax payers for these people to pander to their base?

  2. pnr

    Assuming the schools, and not trans-district groups like leagues, etc. are actually allowed to make the decision,

    And assuming that schools are willing to respect the wishes of the schools they are competing against during that competition….

    Sure, let the schools decide for themselves.

    Personally, I think that as bathrooms serve a biological function, a person’s functional biology should govern which one is used. No matter how much someone may think they’re a boy, if they don’t have an “outie” then a urinal is hard to use.

  3. Anonymous

    Since there is nothing about bathroom use in the bill, I hope that you call it what it is . . . shower room bill.

  4. Emoluments Clause

    Maybe we need legislation to appropriate funds for separate restrooms for the pages and interns in Pierre and then totally different restrooms for the legislators,…. What do you all think?

  5. Applying laws to the real world

    When I was in high school and my team visited other schools as the visiting team (male) we often had to use the girls locker room as the home team was using the male locker room and the school had no other facilities. That would be illegal under this bill. So are all the schools going to be required to build men’s and women’s visiting team locker room or will the visiting men’s and women’s teams have to change on the bus?

    1. Tara Volesky

      What a waste of time and money. It will be vetoed anyway. People are much more affected by the IM22.

  6. Anonymous

    This is still a solution in search of a problem. There have been no instances that anyone can point to in which a transgender student has used the locker room or shower facility designated for the opposite biological gender while other students were present. Either students are not making such requests or the schools are already making the appropriate accommodations. And no boys are claiming to be transgender in order to sneak into the girls locker room. This is unnecessary legislation.

  7. Jaa Dee

    It is the corrupt mob in Pierre wasting our money so they can tell their base–they tried… Just like the unConstitutional abortion restriction bills they passed—————This is just one example of the perks of and enormous cost to tax payers by government corruption in a state that is ranked 47th from the bottom for gov. corruption—- they don’t give a d— they know they have their base that will defend their corruption.

    1. Tara Volesky

      But, just look at all the national attention SD is getting. SD, home of Potty Bill Central. Where you are not allowed to potty in peace.

  8. Anonymous

    It wouldn’t be a legislative session if there wasn’t something that made us a national laughingstock.

    Remember how well this worked out for North Carolina?