This article originally appeared in The Texas Tribune

A bill seeking to block transgender and nonbinary Texas youth from updating their birth certificate with their gender identity has received its first approval from the Texas Senate.

Senate Bill 162, filed by Republican state Sen. Charles Perry of Lubbock, proposes requiring an individual’s sex assigned at birth to be included on their birth certificate and limiting the circumstances in which this information could be changed for minors. The proposal lists very few exceptions.

“Senate Bill 162 prohibits sex listed on the birth certificate of a minor from being amended unless the change is to correct a clerical error or complete the birth certificate if the sex was not listed at the time of birth or if the child is intersex and the sex is later determined,” Perry said during the Senate meeting.

The Republican-controlled Senate preliminarily passed SB 162 on Tuesday with a vote of 19-11 after hearing no debate. The bill now awaits its final vote from the full chamber before it could advance to the House.

LGBTQ advocates said the legislation would make it impossible for trans and nonbinary Texas youth to update their birth certificate and subsequently other government documents — such as those required for identification for education, traveling and employment — with their gender identity.

“Birth certificates are a foundational document,” Sasha Buchert, a senior attorney with Lambda Legal, testified during the bill’s committee hearing. “And when people have identity documents — especially trans folks — that are inconsistent with who they are, it places them at risk of violence, bullying and even harassment.”

Beyond these dangers, this proposal could interrupt the process of enrolling in school, participating in extracurricular activities and applying for a passport — according to Ash Hall, a policy and advocacy strategist on LGBTQ rights with ACLU Texas who also testified against the bill at its committee hearing.

The process to change a minor’s gender on a birth certificate is lengthy and convoluted, Hall said. Currently, there is no difference in the process for minors and adults requesting a change to the gender marker on a Texas document — such as the sex listed on a birth certificate — according to a guide from the Texas Legal Service Center. The guide recommends that families seek the advice of an attorney for changes to a minor’s gender marker.

A court order is required to change gender markers on Texas documents. The decision to allow or deny a gender marker change resides with local judges, who have discretion over what proof is needed to confirm the change before issuing a court order.

Individuals seeking a gender marker change on their documents then present the court order to make changes to IDs, such as birth certificates or driver’s licenses.

The proposal would essentially erase trans and nonbinary youth from public life, according to the bill’s opponents.

“It’s already really difficult for trans people to update their birth certificates, and the vast majority of trans people are forced to live with inaccurate documents [that don’t] reflect who we are in the first place,” Hall told The Texas Tribune. “It’s deeply unnecessary, and it is only meant to harm.”

Jacqueline Murphy, a trans woman, testified during the committee’s hearing earlier this month that she was able to update her birth certificate as a minor — and that has made it easier for her to acquire identification for college enrollment and employment.

“The benefits for my peace of mind and physical safety cannot be overstated,” she said. “I expect the aim of this bill is to undermine the legitimacy of trans identity as a whole, particularly among children. … This is a power play aimed at making the lives of transgender children as difficult as possible.”

Hall added this bill includes vague language about designating the sex of intersex children. The bill would require those issuing birth certificates to fill in this field for intersex children “whose sex is later determined.” But missing from the legislation, Hall said, is when that determination is made.

“The intersex community, one of the basic rights they’re asking for is that their bodies not be operated on as infants when they can’t consent and that they get the opportunity to decide what their gender is, instead of having one forced upon them,” Hall said. The bill could eliminate the option for intersex children to change the gender initially determined for them.

Meanwhile, SB 162’s supporters said the bill is needed to “protect current laws that we have to actually protect biological sex,” such as existing restrictions in Texas on trans student athletes’ participation at the high school level. Senate Bill 15, which seeks to extend these restrictions to the college level, has also received preliminary approval from the full chamber — and there’s already enough support for the proposal in the House.

“It’s vitally important to know a person’s sex at birth,” said Jonathan Covey, policy director for the conservative group Texas Values. “It’s particularly important in light of fairness in women’s sports competitions.”

The bill’s backers also support Senate Bill 14, which was heard in the same committee hearing as SB 162 and dominated the meeting. SB 14 seeks to block trans kids from accessing transition-related medical treatments such as puberty blockers and hormone therapies. The ban would also include surgeries, though these rarely happen for youth.

SB 14 is also a priority legislation for Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick, who presides over the Senate. The full chamber is expected to discuss and vote on this legislation this week.

William Melhado contributed to this story.

Disclosure: ACLU Texas has been a financial supporter of The Texas Tribune, a nonprofit, nonpartisan news organization that is funded in part by donations from members, foundations and corporate sponsors. Financial supporters play no role in the Tribune’s journalism. Find a complete list of them here.

The Texas Tribune is a nonpartisan, nonprofit media organization that informs Texans — and engages with them – about public policy, politics, government and statewide issues.

This article originally appeared in The Texas Tribune

It’s been a long day for Robyn Valentine.

Standing in a packed Capitol hallway, the Corpus Christi-based drag performer could be spotted with her pink wig, stage makeup and baby blue clown outfit that comes with a ruffle collar and tulle sleeves. The look had taken about three hours to put together.

“I woke up at about 1 in the morning, just so I could get ready to be in drag,” she said.

For her, being in drag has always come naturally.

“I have always felt drawn to femininity,” she said. “Drag shows me an outlet in which I can embrace being a feminine gay male, but also doing so in an artistic way.”

It’s also business. Valentine has been a drag entertainer for over a decade, and in recent years she’s been performing live and hosting her own shows. And following the COVID-19 economic closures, she said one of her biggest focuses has been working with local businesses — something that has “created a sense of community.”

But now, she worries that Republican legislation designed to limit certain drag performances — on top of rising threats to and protests against these shows — could take away most of what she has built. So it was a no-brainer for her to drive four hours from the coast to Austin in the early morning to fight these bills, which she said target a minority group instead of protecting children, as the bill authors say.

“I came here because the attacks on the LGBTQIA+ community are not going to stop,” Valentine said. “I do fear for the future and what it could mean for my community and my own personal safety, which is why we need to draw a line in the sand now.”

Several other drag performers said they felt the same way as they gathered Thursday around the rotunda and eventually inside the Senate chamber — many of whom came decked out in higher heels, bigger wigs and brighter outfits — to make their voice heard on Senate Bill 12 and Senate Bill 1601. Four days later, the Senate State Affairs Committee voted to send both bills to the full chamber on a 6-2 vote along the partisan line. These proposals would have to pass both the Senate and the House before it could become law.

“I do get nervous. I do get scared. I’ve even had to cancel a show because I’ve had severe anxiety about it,” said Brigitte Bandit, an Austin-based drag performer who donned a bright pink floor-length gown and a big pink wig. “But ultimately, what am I going to do? Hide? I can’t hide. I have to be able to continue fighting for these things in being present and being visible.”

During the Thursday committee hearing, dozens of drag performers and their allies testified against these bills, outnumbering the the bills’ supporters. Opponents of the legislation also said the Republican-led efforts to criminalize certain drag performances were attacks on Texans’ First Amendment rights, while others said the legislation took away Texas parents’ rights to decide what content or culture their children are exposed to.

On the other side, the smaller contingent of the bills’ supporters say the legislation is needed to protect children from sexually explicit materials.

Filed by Republican state Sen. Bryan Hughes of Mineola, SB 12 would impose a $10,000 fine on business owners who host drag shows in front of children — if those performances are sexually oriented. The bill defines a sexually oriented performance as one in which someone is naked or in drag and “appeals to the prurient interest in sex.” The U.S. Supreme Court defines prurient interests as “erotic, lascivious, abnormal, unhealthy, degrading, shameful, or morbid interest in nudity, sex, or excretion.”

Compared to several other Republican proposals that seek to restrict drag shows — including Senate Bill 476 that Hughes previously filed — SB 12 scales down the proposed restriction on drag shows. But performers and their allies said the bill’s language is still vague.

“The bill being proposed is being left purposely vague to scare people out of interpretation,” Valentine said prior to the hearing. “I’ve seen many different people propose different interpretations already.”

During the Thursday hearing, Democratic Sen. José Menéndez of San Antonio voiced a similar concern about SB 12.

“I am concerned that what this is going to do is just put a target on the backs of certain people in certain businesses,” he said.

Hughes also filed SB 1601, which would withhold state funds from municipal libraries that host events in which drag performers read kids’ books to children.

These libraries don’t receive their operational funding directly from the state, according to a statement from the Texas Library Association. Instead, libraries can get money through competitive grant programs run by the Texas State Library and Archives Commission, the association said — around $2 million is distributed each year. SB 1601 could stop libraries hosting drag shows from being able to receive such grants the year after the events were held, the TLA said.

Baylor Johnson, the marketing and public information program manager for the Austin Public Library, is opposing SB 1601. In the past three years, the Austin Public Library has hosted at least two drag queen storytime programs at the request of members, which he said were age-appropriate and earned positive responses from families.

“Austin Public Library supports a parent’s right to make decisions about what kind of learning or entertainment experiences are appropriate for their child,” Johnson said. “Would a female librarian donning a Santa hat and beard to read ‘Twas the Night Before Christmas’ jeopardize the library’s state funding?”

The bills’ opponents also spoke about the importance of drag shows to the Texas economy, with these events drawing patrons to restaurants and bars to serve as an economic driver for small-business owners. They have also been a key way to raise funds for charities.

Janson Woodlee, who spoke on behalf of the Equality Alliance, an LGBTQ advocacy and philanthropic organization in Central Texas, testified that drag performances were a central component of the organization’s annual “Unite The Fight Gala.” Woodlee said last year’s gala raised over $200,000 for LGBTQ organizations in Texas.

On the other hand, less than a dozen supporters of the bills spoke at Thursday’s hearing. They said the legislation is needed to protect children from explicit materials and performances.

“Bringing children around sexual content is a targeted assault on their minds and bodies that should never be tolerated in a civilized society,” said Kelly Neidert, a conservative activist and founder of Protect Texas Kids, an organization that protests drag events.

Protect Texas Kids has been part of at least 14 drag event protests since it was founded just before Pride Month last June.

But the bills’ opponents said lawmakers are focusing on the wrong issue if they are trying to protect kids. Instead, they implored lawmakers to turn their attention toward gun violence or sexual abuse by church members.

Additionally, they say drag is simply an art form that shouldn’t be attacked.

“To restrict drag — an art form — in any way is a direct attack on my fundamental rights as an American and as a performer,” said Jay Thomas, an Austin resident who performs in drag as Bobby Pudrido.

William Melhado contributed to this story.

The Texas Tribune is a nonpartisan, nonprofit media organization that informs Texans — and engages with them – about public policy, politics, government and statewide issues.

This article originally appeared in The Texas Tribune

West Texas A&M University President Walter Wendler is drawing ire for canceling a student drag show, arguing that such performances degrade women and are “derisive, divisive and demoralizing misogyny.”

Students and First Amendment lawyers reject those assertions, calling his comments a mischaracterization of the art form. They also argue that the cancellation violates students’ constitutional rights and a state law that broadly protects free speech on college campuses, potentially setting the university up for a lawsuit.

“Not only is this a gross and abhorrent comparison of two completely different topics, but it is also an extremely distorted and incorrect definition of drag as a culture and form of performance art,” students wrote in an online petition condemning Wendler’s letter and urging him to reinstate the show.

Students plan to protest every day this week on the campus in the small West Texas city of Canyon, according to a social media post by the Open and Affirming Congregations of the Texas Panhandle.

“Drag is not dangerous or discriminatory, it is a celebration and expression of individuals,” student Signe Elder said in a statement. “Amidst the current climate of growing anti-trans and anti-drag rhetoric, we believe that it is important now more than ever to stand together and be heard.”

Elder is part of a group of students who have organized under the name Buffs for Drag, referring to the school’s buffalo mascot, to protest Wendler’s actions.

Drag shows frequently feature men dressing as women in exaggerated styles and have been a mainstay in the LGBTQ community for decades. Drag performers say their work is an expression of queer joy — and a form of constitutionally protected speech about societal gender norms.

But Wendler said drag shows “stereotype women in cartoon-like extremes for the amusement of others and discriminate against womanhood” in a Monday letter that was first obtained by Amarillo news site MyHighPlains.com. Wendler said the drag show was organized to raise money for The Trevor Project, a nonprofit that works to reduce suicides in the LGBTQ community. Wendler noted that it is a “noble cause” but argued the shows would be considered an act of workplace prejudice because they make fun of women.

“Forward-thinking women and men have worked together for nearly two centuries to eliminate sexism,” Wendler wrote. “Women have fought valiantly, seeking equality in the voting booth, marketplace and court of public opinion. No one should claim a right to contribute to women’s suffering via a slapstick sideshow that erodes the worth of women.”

His comments and decision to cancel the campus drag show come amid surging uproar over the lively entertainment as far-right extremist groups have recruited conservatives to protest the events, claiming that drag performances are sexualizing kids.

Republican Texas lawmakers have also homed in on the performances with a handful of bills that would regulate or restrict drag shows, including some legislation that would classify any venue that hosts a drag show as a sexually oriented business, regardless of the show’s content. On Thursday, a Senate committee will debate a scaled-back bill that would impose a $10,000 fine on business owners who host drag shows in front of children — if those performances are sexually oriented. The bill defines a sexually oriented performance as one in which someone is naked or in drag and “appeals to the prurient interest in sex.”

Rachel Hill, government affairs director for LGBTQ advocacy group Equality Texas, said drag doesn’t mock women. Instead, she said, it’s an art form that allows performers to explore their gender expression and take back power from what she said can be stifling gender norms.

“Drag has always been a way for people who don’t easily fit into the gender binary to embrace different facets of themselves,” Hill said in a statement to The Texas Tribune. “Womanhood comes in all shapes and sizes and is what we make of it. That’s what makes drag so powerful.”

West Texas A&M student groups were organizing the drag show, called “A Fool’s Drag Race,” for months. The LGBTQ student group Spectrum advertised the show on its Instagram page, encouraging people to sign up to perform.

Wendler argued in his letter that the West Texas A&M drag show goes against the U.S Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s purpose, saying it’s inappropriate even if drag shows are not illegal.

A lawyer for the national campus free speech group Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression rejected that argument as “nonsense.”

“The only prejudice in play here is his,” said lawyer Alex Morey, arguing that Wendler has violated state and federal law by canceling the show.

In a statement to The Texas Tribune, Morey said that performances on campus such as drag shows are protected by the First Amendment.

“By unilaterally canceling the event because he personally disapproves of the views it might express, WTAMU’s president appears to have violated both his constitutional obligations and state law,” Morey said. “It’s really surprising how open he is about knowingly violating the law, especially because government officials who violate clearly established First Amendment law will not retain qualified immunity and can be held personally liable for monetary damages.”

The students who started the petition also accused Wendler of violating university policy, which states the school can’t deny student groups any benefits “on the basis of a political, religious, philosophical, ideological, or academic viewpoint expressed by the organization or any expressive activities of the organization.”

In 2019, Texas lawmakers passed a law that required universities to allow any person to engage in free-speech activities on campuses. The law passed with broad bipartisan support.

A West Texas A&M spokesperson said Tuesday morning that Wendler did not have any further comments. The Texas A&M University System, which oversees West Texas A&M, also declined to comment.

This is not the first time Wendler has been criticized for his comments related to people in the LGBTQ community. When he was chancellor of Southern Illinois University, he was criticized for pushing back on the board’s decision to extend certain medical benefits to same-sex partners, saying the measure would encourage “sinful behavior,” according to a local newspaper at the time.

Last year, Texas A&M University in College Station drew criticism from students when the office of student affairs announced it would no longer sponsor Draggieland, the annual drag show competition that started in 2020. Students held the performance last year after raising money through private donations. This year’s event is scheduled for April 6.

Alex Nguyen contributed to this story.

Disclosure: Equality Texas, Texas A&M University, Texas A&M University System and West Texas A&M University have been financial supporters of The Texas Tribune, a nonprofit, nonpartisan news organization that is funded in part by donations from members, foundations and corporate sponsors. Financial supporters play no role in the Tribune’s journalism. Find a complete list of them here.

The Texas Tribune is a nonpartisan, nonprofit media organization that informs Texans — and engages with them – about public policy, politics, government and statewide issues.