As the United States enters 2025, a new wave of anti-transgender legislation is sweeping across the country, spearheaded by Republican lawmakers. At the forefront of this movement is Montana House Bill 121, which seeks to ban transgender individuals from using bathrooms that align with their gender identity in publicly owned buildings. Introduced by Republican Representative Kerri Seekins-Crowe, the bill represents one of the most extreme measures of its kind, targeting transgender adults in a state that already has two openly transgender elected officials: Representatives Zooey Zephyr and SJ Howell.
The implications of this legislation extend far beyond its immediate effects on transgender individuals. If passed, HB 121 would prohibit transgender people from using appropriate restrooms in public colleges, libraries, museums, state airports, hospitals, rest stops, and even Montana’s Capitol building. This wide-reaching measure would fundamentally alter the daily lives of transgender Montanans and place additional burdens on public institutions tasked with enforcing the law.
The Backdrop of Anti-Transgender Hostility
This proposed bathroom ban is part of a broader national strategy that has made transgender rights a political battleground. Following the 2024 election, Congresswoman Nancy Mace launched a vitriolic campaign against Representative Sarah McBride, the first transgender member of the U.S. Congress. Mace’s attacks culminated in Speaker Mike Johnson adopting a policy barring transgender individuals from using gender-affirming restrooms in the U.S. Capitol, setting a dangerous precedent.
In Montana, this hostility is mirrored by HB 121, which builds on a failed attempt in 2024 to bar Representative Zephyr from using women’s restrooms in the state Capitol. During that earlier debate, Republican David Bedey warned against such measures, noting, “This particular action will have the effect of making people famous in the national news and will not contribute to the effective conduct of our business.” Despite his concerns, Montana Republicans have doubled down, framing HB 121 as protection for cisgender women and children.
Opposing Voices: Privacy, Dignity, and the Right to Exist
The proposed bill has drawn sharp criticism from advocates, legal experts, and community members who see it as an attack on the privacy and dignity of transgender individuals. Nash Walden, a transgender man who has lived as male for years, testified during the bill’s hearing: “This bill incorrectly defines me as a woman and would require me to use the women’s bathroom. No one would be comfortable with that.”
Critics of the bill also highlight the absurdity and impracticality of enforcement. Jennifer Olson, representing the Montana League of Cities and Towns, questioned whether public facilities would be required to post guards or install cameras to monitor bathroom use. Such measures, opponents argue, would violate privacy rights and drain public resources.
Dandilion Cloverdale, of TransVisible Montana, denounced the bill for perpetuating harmful stereotypes that portray transgender individuals as predators. “I ask that you let people pee in peace and oppose House Bill 121,” Cloverdale implored lawmakers.
Real-World Impacts on Transgender Lives
The physical and emotional toll of bathroom bans on transgender individuals cannot be overstated. Studies have documented how these laws force transgender people into situations where they must risk violence, harassment, or health complications. In one notable case, a transgender man in Ohio complied with a demand to use the women’s restroom, only to be violently attacked by other patrons who mistook him for a transgender woman.
Cisgender individuals are not immune to the repercussions of these policies. Gender-nonconforming cisgender women, such as those with short hair or androgynous features, are frequently mistaken for transgender individuals and harassed in public restrooms. A viral incident in Las Vegas highlighted this issue when a cisgender woman was harassed by police after being falsely accused of being transgender.
A National Trend of Legislative Attacks
HB 121 is part of a broader national trend, with over 140 anti-LGBTQ+ bills introduced in the opening days of the 2025 legislative session. Congresswoman Mace has already proposed a federal bathroom ban for transgender individuals on all federal properties, including national parks, military bases, and VA hospitals. If enacted, these measures would force transgender Americans into humiliating and unsafe situations, stripping them of basic human rights in spaces funded by their own tax dollars.
Proponents of these bills, such as Riley Gaines, a former collegiate swimmer, argue that the legislation protects women and children. During a remote testimony supporting HB 121, Gaines recounted her experiences competing against transgender athlete Lia Thomas, framing them as evidence of a broader “threat” to women’s spaces. These narratives, however, rely on anecdotal evidence and ignore the realities of existing laws that already criminalize assault and harassment.
If HB 121 is passed, it is almost certain to face legal challenges. Organizations such as the ACLU and TransVisible Montana have argued that the bill violates constitutional protections for privacy and equality. Additionally, Montana’s own Constitution enshrines a right to privacy that could form the basis for striking down the legislation.
Legal arguments aside, the broader question remains: why target a vulnerable population for political gain? Rep. Zooey Zephyr, a vocal opponent of the bill, questioned its sponsor directly: “Who did you consult within this state?” Zephyr’s pointed question underscores a troubling reality—these bills are often drafted without input from the communities they most deeply affect.
The Bottom Line
As Montana’s House Judiciary Committee prepares to vote on HB 121, the stakes could not be higher for the state’s transgender population. Beyond the immediate implications for bathroom access, this legislation symbolizes a broader assault on the dignity and humanity of transgender individuals. It forces people like Viridian Miller, a transgender woman who embraces both masculine and feminine traits, into a perilous position where simply existing becomes an act of defiance.
Transgender rights are not just a political issue—they are a matter of survival. As opponents of HB 121 have made clear, these measures create real harm, exacerbating the violence and discrimination that transgender people already face. For allies and advocates, the path forward is clear: amplify transgender voices, challenge harmful legislation, and work tirelessly to ensure that all people can live with dignity and respect.
Let us not forget the words of Kristen Jordan, a Missoula City Council member who testified against HB 121: “This legislation undermines the values of privacy and safety already enshrined in Montana’s Constitution. It’s inhumane, unethical, and costly to enforce.” The fight against HB 121—and the broader wave of anti-transgender legislation—demands our collective action and unwavering commitment to justice.
