RALEIGH, N.C. — More than a year after North Carolina undid its "bathroom bill," a legal battle is simmering over a law that replaced it.
A federal judge on Monday heard arguments from transgender advocates who claim in a lawsuit that the replacement law still discriminates against the LGBT community. For their part, Republican leaders in the North Carolina General Assembly are fighting to have the lawsuit dismissed.
Download the WSOCTV news app for your smartphone and get updates on this story and other breaking news as they come in.
The replacement law, passed in 2017, was intended to quell the furor that arose when the state in 2016 passed House Bill 2, which required transgender people to use restrooms in many public buildings that corresponded to their sex at birth.
The replacement law did away with that requirement, but it also spelled out who was in charge of making such bathroom rules in the first place: state lawmakers - and not local governments. The new law also prohibited local governments from enacting new non-discrimination ordinances for workplaces, hotels, and restaurants until December 2020.
"It permanently restricts cities from being able to protect transgender people in restrooms and that is discriminatory,” said Ames Simmons, a transgender man with Equality North Carolina.
[PAST COVERAGE: What is the difference between HB142 and HB2?]
[PAST COVERAGE: AP Exclusive: 'Bathroom bill' to cost North Carolina $3.76B]
Simmons told Channel 9 that current law hurts young transgender students the most.
"I know we have fielded stories from people across North Carolina who are affected students who are just not using the restroom at school because they don't feel safe using either restroom,” Simmons said. “We know that that has serious health impacts for these students.”
The lawsuit claims the replacement law still hurts transgender people by creating ambiguity about restroom access and preventing local officials from providing clarity or passing laws to protect LGBT rights. The GOP leaders argue, however, that the new law doesn't deprive the LGBT community of legal protections and that any uncertainty over bathroom rules doesn't amount to legal harm.
"It's also important not to lose sight of the fact that there are actual people being hurt by this law,” Simmons said.
The replacement law wasn't met with enthusiasm, but it appeared to be a compromise that helped dim the harsh spotlight that had been cast on the state for its handling of LGBT rights.
[READ MORE: Bank adds 1,200 North Carolina jobs stalled by HB2]
[READ MORE: NCAA brings back tournament games to NC following HB2 repeal]
"It really only satisfied the people who wanted to get it off the headlines. And I think it was successful in that," said Chris Cooper, a political science professor at Western Carolina University.
Simmons said there is a need for better LGBT protections, and an example of equality needs to be set.
“The fact that we're still continuing to argue about it, about our basic safety in going about our lives outside of our homes, is a heavy weight,” Simmons said.
After the original "bathroom bill" was enacted in 2016, company leaders halted or delayed plans to bring thousands of jobs to North Carolina in response to a boycott campaign. Major sporting events pulled out of the state.
But since the compromise last year, the state has again become an attractive location for out-of-state corporations. And the NBA, NCAA and Atlantic Coast Conference have decided to bring back championship events.
Tami Fitzgerald, executive director of the conservative N.C. Values Coalition, said her group thinks the replacement law is working and creates a business-friendly environment by giving businesses the flexibility to set their own policies. Her group, which supported H.B. 2, hopes lawmakers will extend the moratorium on new local nondiscrimination ordinances past 2020.
Further, she said, she believes most parents around the state share her concerns about privacy.
"The majority of parents want their children to be free from confronting a person of the opposite sex in their bathroom, their shower or their locker room," she said.
However, Chris Brook of the American Civil Liberties Union of North Carolina said there's "nothing hypothetical" about the harm caused by the current law, known as H.B. 142.
"There's evidence in the record that students in the public school system have been told by their schools that H.B. 142 makes it illegal for them to utilize the restroom that accords with their gender identity," said Brook, who is representing the transgender plaintiffs.
The plaintiffs are urging the judge to consider the plight of a transgender elementary student from Wilmington who's barred from using the girls' bathrooms.
The girl's mother, Ericka Myers, said in court documents that doctors have recommended her daughter live as a female in all aspects of her life. But Myers said the principal told her in 2017 that it was illegal for her daughter, then 8, to use the girls' bathrooms.
The girl was offered use of a nurse's restroom or one in the teacher's lounge, but Myers said that her daughter feels humiliated and singled out for being "the only student forced to use them."
New Hanover County Schools issued a statement declining to comment on Myers' account, but said the district works individually with students to accommodate their needs.
On Monday, the judge did not provide a timeline for when a ruling would be made.
Read more top trending stories on wsoctv.com:
- CMPD investigates 2 crime scenes after overnight shootout
- Former Lake Norman HS teacher accused of sex with teen faces judge
- Abandoned as a newborn, NC teen graduates from high school
- WATCH: Keith Monday's Monday forecast outlook
- Providence Day student dies from injuries in Argentina bus crash
Associated Press
/cloudfront-us-east-1.images.arcpublishing.com/cmg/LH3JSJEF3VBLRJLJQESEAG34AM.png)
