Nevada legislators are reconsidering a bill vetoed two years ago that would protect out-of-state patients who seek gender-affirming care in the Silver State.
State Sen. James Ohrenschall, D-Las Vegas, presented Senate Bill 171, which would enact a shield law to protect the transgender community by protecting patients who seek care from out of state and the providers who perform the care.
The legislation, similar to a bill passed last session protecting out-of-state abortion seekers, comes on the heels of recent laws in other states banning gender-affirming health care for transgender children and teenagers, Ohrenschall said.
“Senate Bill 171 addresses this growing concern about the political politicization of health care and the potential for discrimination against transgender and gender non-conforming individuals,” he said.
Between 2018 and 2022, 48 anti-gender-affirming care laws were passed in 19 states, he said. Some of those laws include imposing a fine of up to $15,000 on health care providers and up to 10 years in prison, Ohrenschall said.
What the bill entails
The bill seeks to protect gender-affirming services that are considered medically necessary treatments for individuals who experience gender dysphoria, which is a condition that results from a mismatch between a person’s gender identity and the sex assigned to that person at birth, Ohrenschall said, citing the American Psychiatric Association.
Gender-affirming health care services include hormone therapy, surgery or psychotherapy, Ohrenschall said.
An individual must meet certain diagnostic criteria to be diagnosed with gender dysphoria, including significant distress or impairment in social settings or other important areas of functioning, Ohrenschall said.
Senate Bill 171 seeks to prohibit health care licensing boards from disqualifying or punishing a licensee for providing or assisting in gender-affirming health care. Those protections only apply if the services were provided with parental consent, except if there’s a Nevada law that authorizes a minor to consent to the services, Ohrenschall said.
Excluded from the protections are circumstances in which executive authority of another state demands the surrender of a person who fled the state and was physically present in that state at the time of the alleged offense, according to the bill text.
Ohrenschall said the bill also would prohibit the governor from surrendering, or issuing an arrest warrant for, an individual charged in another state with a crime that involves providing, assisting or receiving gender-affirming care, unless those acts also are considered criminal under Nevada law.
Another go
In 2023, Ohrenschall’s bill was passed by both chambers but was vetoed by Gov. Joe Lombardo.
Lombardo said in his veto message the legislation inhibited the executive branch’s ability to be sure that all gender-affirming care related to minors comports with state law. He also said it decreased his authority to ensure “the highest public health and child safety standards for Nevadans.”
Ohrenschall said he went over the governor’s veto message regarding Senate Bill 302 and believes his new bill addresses Lombardo’s concerns. The bill ensures that only medically necessary care that follows state law will be provided to patients across the state, Ohrenschall said.
Passionate testimony
Lawmakers heard heartfelt testimony for and against the bill Friday. Supporters highlighted increased rates of suicide attempts in the transgender community following the passages of anti-trans laws, and how gender-affirming care lowers odds of depression. Opponents of the bill said it does not follow common sense and should not apply to minors seeking care.
Nevada resident Rachel Grimm said that as a parent, her job is to support her child as they develop and figure out who they’re going to be. When her 10-year-old, whom Grimm only knew as a little girl, told Grimm that he wanted to live life as a boy, Grimm didn’t know what to do. She didn’t understand gender fluidity or gender dysphoria.
“But fortunately, empathy doesn’t require personal experience. It only requires us to believe someone else when they share their lived experience,” Grimm said.
Grimm said she wants to ensure that her child has access to care, resources and providers who can help, and she doesn’t want her doctor fearing prosecution when providing care.
Jim DeGraffenreid, Nevada’s Republican national committeeman, said the bill is an unnecessary political statement that attempts to extend Nevada’s authority beyond the state line. He also said it doesn’t address the objections the governor raised in 2023.
“No other states are prosecuting doctors for performing legal procedures in Nevada that might be illegal in that state,” he said. “That will be the equivalent of a state where gambling is illegal attempting to prosecute a resident of that state for gambling while on vacation in Las Vegas.”
Contact Jessica Hill at jehill@reviewjournal.com. Follow @jess_hillyeah on X.
