Loading articles...

The Latest: California Assembly passes all-gender restrooms

Last Updated May 9, 2016 at 4:20 pm MDT

SACRAMENTO, Calif. – The Latest on California’s bill to make single-occupant restrooms gender neutral (all times local):

2:10 p.m.

California’s lower legislative chamber has passed a bill to require single-person public restrooms to be gender neutral.

The Assembly’s 52-18 vote Monday came as North Carolina and the federal government sued each other over that state’s law requiring transgender people to use the restroom matching the sex on their birth certificate.

The law also limits discrimination protections for LGBT people. The U.S. Justice Department said last week that North Carolina’s law violates civil rights.

California Assemblyman Phil Ting of San Francisco aims to help transgender people, caregivers and parents with AB1732.

Republican Assemblyman James Gallagher of Plumas Lake says men’s messy habits, including what he calls “pee seats,” will inconvenience many more people than the bill would help. Gallagher says the bill applies too broadly.

Ting, a Democrat, says people should clean up after themselves.

___

1:50 p.m.

A California lawmaker says he’s bringing up for a vote his proposal to require single-person public restrooms to be gender neutral.

The vote expected Monday afternoon comes hours after North Carolina Gov. Pat McCrory sued the federal government to defend that state’s law requiring transgender people to use the restroom matching the sex on their birth certificate.

The law also limits discrimination protections for LGBT people. The U.S. Justice Department said last week that North Carolina’s law violates civil rights.

In California, Democratic Assemblyman Phil Ting of San Francisco aims to help transgender people, caregivers and parents with kids of different genders.

The bill would ask inspectors and officials who enforce building code to check restroom signs for compliance. A state association of health officers no longer opposes the bill.

___

This story has been corrected to reflect that a state association of health officers no longer opposes AB1732.