Iowa Calms the ‘Gender Identity’ Trend

Iowa Law Removes Gender Identity Protections

A new law in Iowa took effect on Tuesday, striking “gender identity” from the state’s civil rights laws. This makes Iowa the first state to officially roll back protections related to gender identity.

Signed by Republican Governor Kim Reynolds in March, the law defines gender based solely on biological sex and prohibits changes to the sex listed on birth certificates. The intent, according to the law’s text, is to align the state’s civil rights regulations with the purported need to safeguard the “health, safety, and privacy” of Iowans, particularly women. Reynolds asserted that women were “at risk” before this legislation was implemented.

“Today, I am signing a bill to protect the rights of women and girls in the law,” Reynolds stated in a video announcement. “It’s common sense to acknowledge obvious biological differences between men and women. We need to ensure true equal protection for women and girls.” She added that there aren’t separate spaces for men and women, suggesting a clear delineation based on sex.

Previously, gender identity protections were included in Iowa’s civil rights law, introduced under a Democratic-led Congress in 2007. The new law strengthens other measures enacted by Iowa Republicans, including bans on gender transition procedures for minors and restrictions on bathroom usage based on biological sex.

This legislation moved swiftly through GOP-controlled lawmakers this year but drew strong criticism from progressives. LGBT advocates warned that it would likely lead to increased discrimination and abuse, while all Iowa House Democrats and Senate members opposed the bill.

Interestingly, public sentiment seems to align with the law’s general principles. A recent AP-NORC survey indicated that about two-thirds of respondents believe gender is determined by biological characteristics at birth.

The law fits within a larger trend among Republican-led states to challenge gender identity policies, particularly those affecting minors. Last month, a Supreme Court decision upheld a ban in Tennessee on hormone treatments for adolescents.

At the federal level, President Donald Trump recently signed an executive order that cut off federal funding for chemical and surgical procedures for children, also warning agencies against supporting such practices. Additionally, he issued a directive preventing men from competing in women’s sports, with the Department of Education investigating states like Maine and California for potential violations.