See how transgender-related bills have moved through the 2025 Montana Legislative session

The Lee Enterprises Montana State News Bureau is closely following major bills moving through the 2025 Montana Legislature. Lawmakers have heard a significant number of proposals that would impact the rights of trans people in daily life.

Find the Montana State News Bureau's latest coverage on the property tax bills here:

Here is a breakdown of how some of the more significant proposals advanced or faltered throughout earlier stretches of the session: 

Trans rights at transmittal: a flurry of bills, mixed results

Overview: Heading into the Legislature's transmittal deadline, lawmakers had a final opportunity to introduce policy bills that would impact the rights of trans people in a number of arenas. While Democrats were joined by GOP colleagues to kill some of the proposals that would curtail trans rights, other bills sailed through largely along party lines. 

Montana Legislature: Where things stand at the session's halfway mark and what comes next

Senate Bill 437: Defining 'sex' as binary

The Senate passed a bill to codify into state law that there are only two sexes — male and female — defined by reproductive systems.

Senate Bill 437 comes on the heels of a Missoula district court judge's decision that a bill from last session seeking to do the same thing was unconstitutional.

But Sen. Carl Glimm, R-Kila, sponsor of the 2023 bill and this year's SB 437, said the current iteration addresses those legal concerns because it better accounts for the existence of intersex people and other chromosomal anomalies and outlines the difference between sex and gender identity.

“This bill is only defining sex, which is a biological thing,” said Sen. Barry Usher, R-Yellowstone County. “Gender is a socially manufactured phenomenon. Gender is how people feel. Not biological, not medical.”

SB 437 passed with the support of all but one Republican senator.

Montana Senate advances bill to define 'sex' as binary, despite past legal challenges

House Bill 675: Drag shows 

A bill from a Belgrade Republican to give minors and their parents the right to sue anyone who "knowingly promotes, conducts or participates as a performer" in drag performances failed to make it out of the House after being greenlit by the chamber's Judiciary Committee.

House Bill 675 from Rep. Caleb Hinkle sought to remedy legal questions raised by a 2023 bill that banned drag performances in schools, libraries and other public spaces but has since been temporarily blocked by a federal judge. It would have created definitions for "drag king" and "drag queen" as being inherently sexual.

Opponents argued drag is art and that the proposal would have created a chilling effect on a form of free expression and free speech. Supporters cited parents rights, but that argument fell flat even with some of their Republican colleagues.

“Everybody in here talks about how important parental rights are,” said Rep. Sherry Essman, R-Billings. “Parental responsibility is also important, and if you can’t trust a decent parent to decide where and when their kids should see what, then we have a bigger problem.”

Parent's rights: Montana drag show bill fails while 'identity instruction' bill lives on

House Bills 690 and 754: Child Protective Services 

Lawmakers this session have also looked at the state's child welfare program and how, if at all, parental support of a minor receiving gender-affirming care should factor into potential cases of abuse and neglect.

House Bill 690 from Rep. Bill Mercer, a Republican from Billings, would specify that parents have the right to raise their child in a way that aligns with their sex assigned at birth, and they should not be investigated for abuse and neglect by CPS if they decline to support any kind of gender-affirming care.

While Mercer said that abuse and neglect should have "nothing to do" with raising the child in a way that's consistent with their biological sex, opponents such as Rep. SJ Howell, a Missoula Democrat, cautioned that every situation is different and that the bill could force child protective workers to ignore the specific "facts on the ground."

Rep. David Bedey, R-Hamilton, who spoke in support of the bill, said there should be "deference to parents in these particular matters as they are fundamental building blocks in our society and rightfully should have a predominant role in the raising of our children."

HB 690 passed the House 57-42.

But House Bill 754, which would have gone a step further by requiring a child receiving transition care with parental support be removed from the home, did make it out of the chamber.

Bill sponsor Rep. Lukas Schubert, R-Kalispell, said that "young people deserve protections" for "life-altering" choices that they may later regret, referring to gender-affirming care.

Howell countered that "every time a child is removed from their family," it's a tragedy, and that the gravity of emergency removals was not at all contemplated in HB 754.

The bill failed 27-71.

Transgender rights to access, use bathrooms and changing areas| HB 121 + HB 446

Overview: House Bill 121, would ban trans individuals from bathrooms, changing rooms and sleeping areas that don’t align with their sex assigned at birth. The bill, sponsored by Rep. Kerri Seekins-Crowe, R-Billings, defines sex as binary based on chromosomal makeup and genitalia. Another from Rep. Jedidiah Hinkle, House Bill 446, would modify indecent exposure laws in a way that could specifically impact trans people. 

Update: Friday, February 28 

In a heated House floor hearing Friday, multiple lawmakers expressed exhaustion and embarrassment when being asked to vote on another bill to curb transgender rights.

“I am getting very, very tired of rising on bills targeting the transgender community,” Rep. Zooey Zephyr, a transgender lawmaker from Missoula. “It is getting exhausting”

Hinkle's HB 446 passed second reading on 54-45, which means it will be up for a third reading vote before it advances from the House. The Belgrade Republican lauded the proposal as a step to protect “human dignity.”

Critics from both sides of the aisle disagreed.

“There is no argument for common sense on this one,” said. Rep. Pete Elverum, R-Helena. “I know it’s tough, I know you’re sitting there, this is the one. There is no justification for this law.”

Update: Monday, February 17

House Bill 446 from Rep. Jedidiah Hinkle was heard in front of the House Judiciary Committee Monday. It would amend existing state law so that any person who “knowingly or purposely exposes their genitals or intimate parts to members of the opposite biological sex or opposite the person’s sex assigned at birth” in public spaces could be punished for indecent exposure, which carries a misdemeanor charge. It would apply in a long list of public places.

Critics of the bill cautioned that the bill would create legal grey zones in a wide range of normal day-to-day activities for trans people. Those include a trans woman taking a shower in a women’s gym locker room or changing into a swimsuit at the city pool, or a trans man using the urinal at a sporting event.

“We have had a lot of anti-trans bills in the past,” said Kelsen Young, the director of the Montana Coalition against Domestic and Sexual Violence. “But this one feels personally targeted and mean-spirited in a way that I haven’t seen before, and that’s because you are trying to criminalize normal human behavior.”

Advocates fight for transgender rights, say 'it doesn’t matter what you do in these rooms'

Update: Monday, February 10

HB 121 appeared poised to pass the Senate and head to the governor's desk after it a preliminary, party-line vote on Monday.

Republicans rejected a change to the bill offered by Democrats to extend the ban’s start date out to July 1. Democrats said the immediate effective date would kill state funding for homeless and domestic violence shelters that operate largely on public dollars, while a delayed start date would give those facilities a chance to seek out private donors.

Sen. Jeremy Trebas, R-Great Falls, argued that state funding often comes with state-set conditions which are the legislature’s prerogative.

Still, Republicans were not swayed. Even in a session where moderates have broke with Democrats on several key issues, GOP senators voted together to give preliminary approval to HB 121.

The bill now requires one more procedural vote from the Senate before it advances to the desk of Republican Gov. Greg Gianforte.

Organizations brace for immediate effects of MT 'bathroom bill' awaiting gov's signature

Update: Friday, January 31

The Senate Judiciary Committee heard arguments for and against the bill, prompting another lengthy hearing filled with testimony.

Earlier that week, about a dozen people, some of whom were trans and assigned female at birth, sought to demonstrate the potential impact of HB 121 by using the Capitol bathrooms they would be required to use under the law. One individual told the committee he received puzzled looks, under-the-breath mutters and even a report to building security just for using the restroom he would be supposed to per HB 121's language.

Sara Beth Nolan, an attorney from the Alliance Defending Freedom, sought to address concerns that the legislation would prove cumbersome or overly punitive for public entities. She said compliance details would be left to individual facilities, but suggested creating single-use spaces, putting locks on multi-use areas or asking people about their biological sex without requiring documentation.

The committee will vote on the bill at some point next week. If it passes, it will advance to the Senate floor.

Update: Thursday, January 16

Montana lawmakers in the House cast votes along party lines to support the legislation.

The House floor debate epitomized a rift that’s become familiar in the halls of the Montana State Capitol – whether laws that disproportionately impact trans people constitute discrimination or benignly uphold long-held and immutable norms.

“I think we’ve gotten a little sideways about what Montana values are,” said Rep. SJ Howell, D-Missoula. “Because Montana values, they aren’t complicated. They aren’t political. Montana values are simple. Love thy neighbor, mind thy business. This bill does neither.”

But Rep. Kerri Seekins-Crowe, R-Billings, the bill’s sponsor, insisted HB 121 is “not about exclusion." Rather, she said, it’s necessary to protect women and young girls from harassment or sexual violence at the hands of men.

Update: Friday, January 10

HB 121 passed the House Judiciary Committee on Monday.

Billed as a safeguard for women and girls against sexual violence and harassment, HB 121 mirrors legislation, dubbed "bathroom bills," passed in about a dozen Republican-led states. Opponents say the measure further stigmatizes trans people, putting an already at-risk group even more squarely in harm’s way.

Rep. Kerri Seekins-Crowe, R-Billings, insisted at the hearing that the bill doesn’t target any single group, but rather protects all Montanans from harm.

But when asked by Democratic committee members for examples of harassment or sexual violence against women in the types of spaces delineated in the legislation, Seekins-Crowe did not offer any specifics. She said it was a top issue she heard about from constituents while campaigning.

Democrats raised concerns about the far-reaching consequences of the bill on local governments and nonprofits, as well as their employees that would be responsible for implementing its provisions.

Health care for transgender youth | SB 164, SB 218

Overview: SB 164 would make it a felony for a person to knowingly provide surgical procedures, puberty blockers or hormone therapies to children under age 16 in order to support transitioning from their sex assigned at birth. The proposal would make doing so a crime under Montana’s child endangerment laws, and would be punishable by up to five years in prison, a fine of $10,000, or both. The bill is sponsored by Sen. John Fuller, R-Kalispell.

Update: Tuesday, February 18 

The Montana Senate advanced SB 218 along party lines.

At this point, both bills from Fuller related to gender-affirming care for trans youth are awaiting hearings on the House Judiciary Committee.

Update: Friday, February 7

The Senate Judiciary Committee heard and passed another bill related to gender-affirming care for trans minors.

SB 218, also sponsored by Fuller, would make any health care professional liable for injury or harm that results from gender-affirming procedures including surgery, puberty blockers or hormone therapy. A patient can bring litigation within 25 years from the date of the last treatment.

Update: Tuesday, February 4

Senate Bill 164 cleared the Montana Senate on Tuesday with the support of all but two Republicans.

It passed the upper chamber on a 30-20 vote over opposition from Senate Democrats and a long list of trans rights advocates, lobbyists for medical associations and health care providers who cautioned that making gender-affirming care health care inaccessible to trans minors would cause them great mental and physical harm.

“This is not something I would be doing for my children,” said Sen. Wendy McKamey, R-Great Falls, during the floor debate on Monday. “But it is something that someone else is trying; they’re trying to find answers for their children.”

Update: Friday, January 31

SB 164 advanced out of the Senate Judiciary Committee on Wednesday, January 29.

During a committee hearing on Friday, supporters of the bill said minors aren’t equipped to make “life-altering medical decisions with irreversible consequences” so the adults who sign off on those choices must be held accountable. Opponents argued that the treatments are essential for the wellbeing of trans minors. Parents and health care providers also feared the bill would put them at risk of legal attacks.

The bill moved through the committee with support from all six Republicans and no Democrats. It goes to the Senate floor next.

Transgender athletes in women’s sports – HB 300

Overview: HB 300 bill would bar people who were assigned male at birth from participating in “an athletic program or activity that is designated for females” in both K-12 public schools and higher education institutions. The bill is sponsored by Rep. Kerri Seekins-Crowe, R-Billings.

Update: Thursday, February 20

After a hearing in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee, HB 300 advanced on the same day on a vote of 5-3.

Update: Wednesday, February 5

HB 300 passed the House on a 57-42 vote along party lines.

It now moves over to the Senate.

Update: Wednesday, February 5

On the same day President Donald Trump signed an executive order prohibiting transgender athletes from girls and women’s sports, some members of the Montana Legislature celebrated similar efforts at the state level.

House Bill 300 cleared an initial hurdle and looked poised to pass the House. The bill passed a preliminary vote 58-42 on party lines.

Democrats criticized HB 300 as another solution in search of a problem, the latest political ploy to curry favor with ideologues and a waste of taxpayer dollars when the state has to fight litigation that might challenge the measure should it become law. Supporters, on the other hand, characterized it as a way to ensure equal opportunity for young female athletes.

Update: Friday, January 31

Members of the House Judiciary Committee sat through a tense hearing on Friday regarding House Bill 300 from sponsor Rep. Kerri Seekins-Crowe, R-Billings.

Seekins-Crowe billed the legislation as a way to reinforce “Montanans' commitment to equality in education by defining sex discrimination” in schools and a tool to “protect the dignity of individuals."

Opponents, meanwhile, said they did not know of any transgender athletes currently competing on Montana women’s sports teams. They argued that the bill could negatively affect transgender people.

“We see how policies that exclude and stigmatize transgender people directly harm their mental and physical well-being,” said Shawn Reagor, a lobbyist with the Bozeman-based sexual health care clinic Bridgercare.