Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the SB 552 Privacy And Single‑sex Spaces topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Lawmakers Hear Hours of Testimony on SB 552, a Bill Allowing Businesses and Schools to Use Biological‑sex Designations
Summary
The Senate Judiciary Committee heard hours of testimony for and against SB 552, which would allow — but not mandate — businesses, schools and religious organizations to designate single‑sex facilities and athletic teams by biological sex. Supporters cited privacy and safety; opponents said the bill is unenforceable and would harm transgender people.
Senators heard more than three hours of testimony on SB 552, a bill that would clarify that entities in New Hampshire may use biological sex — rather than gender identity — to determine access to single‑user restrooms, locker rooms, athletic teams and similar private spaces.
Sen. Kevin Abard, the bill's prime sponsor, said the measure is permissive, not coercive, and would protect organizations that post signage by shielding them from legal liability. "It gives them the option," Abard told the Judiciary Committee, arguing the bill restores local decisionmaking and protects women's privacy and fairness in sports.
The hearing drew a long string of public commenters with sharply divided views. Representative Alice Wade, who identified herself as a trans woman, said forcing trans women into men's restrooms would increase their risk of assault and described fear about how enforcement would work in practice. "Trans women, when forced to go into the men's room, are ... at least 4 times as likely to be assaulted," Wade said.
Legal advocates and civil‑rights witnesses pressed senators on court precedents and enforceability. Michael Haley, a staff attorney at GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders, cited federal injunctions against a 2024 New Hampshire sports law and argued courts require narrowly tailored solutions to protect safety and equal protection rights. Haley pointed to carve‑outs in New Hampshire civil‑rights statutes that already exempt religious organizations from certain liabilities.
Other witnesses described personal incidents in gyms and locker rooms and urged protection of women and girls' privacy. Supporters said businesses should be able to post a sign indicating single‑sex use without fear of litigation; opponents said the bill invites invasive enforcement, vigilante policing and lawsuits, and that it re‑targets a small and vulnerable population.
Committee members repeatedly asked how the law would be enforced, whether schools and towns would be required to adopt policies and how the bill differed from several prior measures vetoed by governors in recent years. Abard emphasized that the bill imposes no mandates.
The hearing included testimony from a wide range of witnesses — parents, coaches, faith leaders, former patients and legal scholars — who alternately urged the committee to move the bill forward or to declare it inexpedient to legislate (ITL). No formal committee vote on SB 552 was recorded in the hearing transcript.
The committee took extensive written and oral testimony and closed the SB 552 hearing after receiving many submissions and answering procedural questions. The committee then proceeded to take up separate, but related, measures on sports and reproductive‑health provider protections.
What happens next: The Judiciary Committee will have the bill on its internal calendar; any motion to recommend passage, amendment, or ITL would be made at a future public meeting or committee work session.
