HB 229
Undercutting the legal existence of transgender and intersex Texans while contradicting medical science and constitutional principles
What's in the bill?
HB 229 codifies a binary definition of sex in Texas law, defining:
- “Female”: An individual whose reproductive system is developed to produce ova.
- “Male”: An individual whose reproductive system is developed to fertilize ova.
The bill mandates that all state records (i.e., birth certificates, driver’s licenses, etc.) reflect this definition, overriding existing legal gender markers for transgender individuals and erasing intersex people whose biology does not fit this framework.
What does it mean?
Legal Erasure of Transgender Texans
Over 120,000 transgender Texans with updated gender markers would be faced with inconsistencies with state and federal IDs (i.e., passports), exposing them to harassment, discrimination, or violence in daily interactions (i.e., traffic stops, airport security).
Intersex Exclusion
The bill’s binary definitions excludes the 1.7% of Texans born with intersex traits. The law fails to provide legal recognition or protections for intersex individuals.
Systemic Confusion
State agencies like DPS and DSHS must spend $2.5 million to remove “unknown” sex designations from databases, creating administrative chaos for agencies and individuals.
What can we do now?
Community Support
Public Education: Equality Texas is launching a statewide Know Your Rights campaign underscoring the specifics of this law and its potential impacts to being in late 2025.
Uplift Mental Health Resources
Mental Health Networks: Uplift organizations like Trans Lifeline, the Trevor Project, and NAMI to provide crisis support.
Policy Advocacy
Push cities and counties to adopt sanctuary policies recognizing gender self-identification, as seen in Austin and Dallas. Equality Texas is already working on legislation for the 2027 legislative session to reverse or mitigate the impact of this legislation if it has not been struck down by the courts.
Frequently Asked Questions
How will this impact my daily life?
More than 120,000 transgender Texans will be defined in all state records by the sex assigned at birth, rather than their gender identity. It doesn’t matter whether they have legally changed their birth certificates or driver’s licenses. This could affect access to services, privacy, and safety in gender-specific spaces such as shelters, restrooms, or sports teams. Intersex individuals may also be forced into a binary classification based on a decision made at birth, without regard to their uniqueness or lived experience.
Will people who have already legally changed their gender marker be forced to revert to their sex assigned at birth?
The bill does not explicitly address whether previously issued documents will be reverted, but all new and updated records will use the binary classification. Recent policies put into place by the Department of Public Safety (drivers licenses) and the Department of Vital Statistics (birth certificates) took a similar approach, and the Attorney General has encouraged agencies to undo previous updates made by transgender Texans.
What about intersex and nonbinary people who do not fit the strict male/female binary?
The bill defines sex strictly as male or female based on reproductive organs at birth, which does not account for the biological diversity of intersex people, nor does it allow for gender expression outside of the binary. In practice, intersex Texans may continue to be assigned a binary sex at birth by a doctor or parent. This assignment will be used in all state records, regardless of their actual biology or identity.
How may this law impact women’s rights and privacy?
Supporters of the bill argue that HB 229 protects women’s rights and privacy by clearly defining “woman” and “man” for legal purposes, ensuring that women’s spaces and opportunities are not “eroded by activists”. However, critics, including many women’s rights advocates, argue that the law is unnecessary, harmful, and could negatively impact women who do not fit traditional reproductive definitions (i.e., those who cannot get pregnant or breastfeed).
Will this law create confusion or conflict with federal antidiscrimination protections?
The simple answer is, maybe. Both Title IX and the Affordable Care Act have established protections around gender identity. If state records do not match a person’s gender identity, it could complicate access to federal programs and protections.
What are the legal and practical implications for schools, healthcare providers, and other institutions?
Schools, healthcare providers, and other institutions may face confusion and administrative burdens in reconciling a student’s or patient’s gender identity with official state records. This could lead to misgendering, privacy violations, and barriers to care or services.
Are there any exceptions or accommodations for people whose legal documents already reflect a gender different from their sex assigned at birth?
No. The bill does not provide exceptions for those who have already legally changed their gender marker on documents.
How does this law compare to similar legislation in other states?
Similar laws have been passed in states like Iowa, Kansas, and Tennessee, which define sex in binary terms for state records. In Montana, a similar law was struck down by a court for violating privacy and equal protection rights. Oklahoma passed a law that required birth certificates to reflect “biological sex” which led to a 30% increase in homelessness among transgender Oklahomans due to ID mismatches. Similar laws have been enacted in Iowa, Kansas, and Tennessee, while Montana’s law was struck down by a court for violating constitutional rights. Montana’s law was found unconstitutional for violating privacy and equal protection, setting a precedent that could be relevant for challenges to laws like Texas HB 229.