Two years ago, while the national parties could barely be in the same chambers as each other, Massachusetts passed a bipartisan bill called “An Act Relative to Transgender Anti-Discrimination.” The bill, which was signed with little controversy or fanfare by Republican Gov. Charlie Baker, offered protections against discrimination to transgender people, and was heralded as a major breakthrough in civil rights for the transgender movement.
Today, voters in Massachusetts are being asked to reconsider this law and will vote on Question 3, which if approved, would keep the 2016 law in place and allow gender identity to remain on the list of protected categories covered by the law, which includes race, sexual orientation and class.
Leading the charge to vote “no” is advocacy group Keep MA Safe who are citing safety concerns around people of the opposite gender, primarily men, abusing the law to enter women’s restrooms for malicious reasons.
On the other side of the fight is the Boston Bruins, Red Sox, Patriots, and Celtics, the AFL-CIO, the Anti-Defamation League, the Massachusetts Chiefs of Police Association, and the ACLU Massachusetts, along with a slew of other groups within the state. Earlier this week, Andrew Beckwith of the “No on 3” campaign participated in a debate on Greater Boston where he concisely told moderator Jim Braude he’s voting “no” because, “I believe that a law that silences women and tells them their objections to male bodies in private spaces is not real, it’s wrong and should be repealed.”
The difficulty for people like Beckwith, however, has actually been providing proof that expanding anti-discrimination protections for transgender people really does lead to an uptick of sexual abuse in places like bathrooms and changing areas. During his debate, Beckwith was only able to cite one example of the law being abused, and his anecdotal evidence stands in contrast with a 2018 study from the Williams Institute at the UCLA School of Law that found no correlation between extending protections to transgender people and sexual crimes occurring in bathrooms.
“Nothing about transgender non-discrimination puts anybody at risk,” Carol Rose, executive director of the ACLU Massachusetts said on Boston Public Radio this morning. “That’s why we have the [support of the] Mass Chiefs of Police Association, [and the support of] 200 businesses and industry organizations, faith leaders, mayors, and all the Boston sports teams, I’m really proud to say.”
Despite the opposition to Question 3’s efforts, the latest polling from MassInc says 71% of expected voters planned on voting “yes” while only 17 percent said they would vote “no.” In fact, sentiment in favor of maintaining protections for transgender rights in Massachusetts is so strong members of the Democratic ticket like Senator Elizabeth Warren, Secretary of State Bill Galvin and gubernatorial candidate Jay Gonzalez have capitalized on President Trump’s efforts to repeal protections for transgender people on the national level and senate candidate Geoff Diehl’s opposition to Question 3 to paint a wide brush against the entire Republican ticket to portray their respective opponents as hostile to the transgender community.
For these reasons Rose is optimistic voters will vote “yes” on Question 3, but like any other election, nothing can be certain until the final votes are counted.
“I’m pretty confident we're going to get a ‘yes’ on [Question 3], I’m really hopeful; but I think it requires people to exercise their vote, and to be ruled by love, and ruled by hope, and not to be ruled by fear,” Rose said.
