[Congressional Bills 119th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 15 Introduced in House (IH)]
<DOC>
119th CONGRESS
1st Session
H. R. 15
To prohibit discrimination on the basis of sex, gender identity, and
sexual orientation, and for other purposes.
_______________________________________________________________________
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
April 29, 2025
Mr. Takano (for himself, Ms. Adams, Mr. Aguilar, Mr. Amo, Ms. Ansari,
Mr. Auchincloss, Ms. Balint, Ms. Barragan, Mrs. Beatty, Mr. Bell, Mr.
Bera, Mr. Beyer, Mr. Bishop, Ms. Bonamici, Mr. Boyle of Pennsylvania,
Ms. Brown, Ms. Brownley, Ms. Budzinski, Ms. Bynum, Mr. Carbajal, Mr.
Carson, Mr. Carter of Louisiana, Mr. Casar, Mr. Case, Mr. Casten, Ms.
Castor of Florida, Mr. Castro of Texas, Mrs. Cherfilus-McCormick, Ms.
Chu, Mr. Cisneros, Ms. Clark of Massachusetts, Ms. Clarke of New York,
Mr. Cleaver, Mr. Clyburn, Mr. Cohen, Mr. Conaway, Mr. Connolly, Mr.
Correa, Mr. Costa, Mr. Courtney, Ms. Craig, Ms. Crockett, Mr. Crow, Ms.
Davids of Kansas, Mr. Davis of Illinois, Ms. Dean of Pennsylvania, Ms.
DeGette, Ms. DeLauro, Ms. DelBene, Mr. Deluzio, Mr. DeSaulnier, Ms.
Dexter, Mrs. Dingell, Mr. Doggett, Ms. Elfreth, Ms. Escobar, Mr.
Espaillat, Mr. Evans of Pennsylvania, Mr. Fields, Mr. Figures, Mrs.
Fletcher, Mr. Foster, Mrs. Foushee, Ms. Lois Frankel of Florida, Ms.
Friedman, Mr. Frost, Mr. Garamendi, Mr. Garcia of California, Ms.
Garcia of Texas, Mr. Garcia of Illinois, Ms. Gillen, Mr. Golden of
Maine, Mr. Goldman of New York, Mr. Gomez, Mr. Vicente Gonzalez of
Texas, Ms. Goodlander, Mr. Gottheimer, Mr. Gray, Mr. Green of Texas,
Mr. Harder of California, Mrs. Hayes, Mr. Hernandez, Mr. Himes, Mr.
Horsford, Ms. Houlahan, Mr. Hoyer, Ms. Hoyle of Oregon, Mr. Huffman,
Mr. Ivey, Mr. Jackson of Illinois, Ms. Jacobs, Ms. Jayapal, Mr.
Jeffries, Ms. Johnson of Texas, Mr. Johnson of Georgia, Ms. Kamlager-
Dove, Ms. Kaptur, Mr. Keating, Ms. Kelly of Illinois, Mr. Kennedy of
New York, Mr. Khanna, Mr. Krishnamoorthi, Mr. Landsman, Mr. Larsen of
Washington, Mr. Larson of Connecticut, Mr. Latimer, Ms. Lee of
Pennsylvania, Ms. Lee of Nevada, Ms. Leger Fernandez, Mr. Levin, Mr.
Liccardo, Mr. Lieu, Ms. Lofgren, Mr. Lynch, Mr. Magaziner, Mr. Mannion,
Ms. Matsui, Mrs. McBath, Ms. McBride, Mrs. McClain Delaney, Ms.
McClellan, Ms. McCollum, Ms. McDonald Rivet, Mr. McGarvey, Mr.
McGovern, Mrs. McIver, Mr. Meeks, Mr. Menendez, Ms. Meng, Mr. Mfume,
Mr. Min, Ms. Moore of Wisconsin, Mr. Morelle, Ms. Morrison, Mr.
Moskowitz, Mr. Moulton, Mr. Mrvan, Mr. Mullin, Mr. Nadler, Mr. Neal,
Mr. Neguse, Mr. Norcross, Ms. Norton, Ms. Ocasio-Cortez, Mr. Olszewski,
Ms. Omar, Mr. Pallone, Mr. Panetta, Mr. Pappas, Ms. Pelosi, Ms. Perez,
Mr. Peters, Ms. Pettersen, Ms. Pingree, Ms. Plaskett, Mr. Pocan, Ms.
Pou, Ms. Pressley, Mr. Quigley, Mrs. Ramirez, Ms. Randall, Mr. Raskin,
Mr. Riley of New York, Ms. Rivas, Ms. Ross, Mr. Ruiz, Mr. Ryan, Ms.
Salinas, Ms. Sanchez, Ms. Scanlon, Ms. Schakowsky, Mr. Schneider, Ms.
Scholten, Ms. Schrier, Mr. Scott of Virginia, Mr. David Scott of
Georgia, Ms. Sewell, Mr. Sherman, Ms. Sherrill, Ms. Simon, Mr. Smith of
Washington, Mr. Sorensen, Mr. Soto, Ms. Stansbury, Mr. Stanton, Ms.
Stevens, Ms. Strickland, Mr. Subramanyam, Mr. Suozzi, Mr. Swalwell,
Mrs. Sykes, Mr. Thanedar, Mr. Thompson of California, Mr. Thompson of
Mississippi, Ms. Titus, Ms. Tlaib, Ms. Tokuda, Mr. Tonko, Mr. Torres of
New York, Mrs. Torres of California, Mrs. Trahan, Mr. Tran, Ms.
Underwood, Mr. Vargas, Mr. Vasquez, Mr. Veasey, Ms. Velazquez, Mr.
Vindman, Ms. Wasserman Schultz, Ms. Waters, Mrs. Watson Coleman, Mr.
Whitesides, Ms. Williams of Georgia, and Ms. Wilson of Florida)
introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on
the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committees on Education and
Workforce, Financial Services, House Administration, and Oversight and
Government Reform, for a period to be subsequently determined by the
Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall
within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned
_______________________________________________________________________
A BILL
To prohibit discrimination on the basis of sex, gender identity, and
sexual orientation, and for other purposes.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the
United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Equality Act''.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS AND PURPOSE.
(a) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
(1) Discrimination can occur on the basis of the sex,
sexual orientation, gender identity, pregnancy, childbirth, or
a related medical condition of an individual, as well as
because of sex-based stereotypes. Each of these factors alone
can serve as the basis for discrimination, and each is a form
of sex discrimination.
(2) A single instance of discrimination may have more than
one basis. For example, discrimination against a married same-
sex couple could be based on the sex stereotype that marriage
should only be between heterosexual couples, the sexual
orientation of the two individuals in the couple, or both. In
addition, some persons are subjected to discrimination based on
a combination or the intersection of multiple protected
characteristics. Discrimination against a pregnant lesbian
could be based on her sex, her sexual orientation, her
pregnancy, or on the basis of multiple factors.
(3) Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer
(referred to as ``LGBTQ'') people commonly experience
discrimination in securing access to public accommodations--
including restaurants, senior centers, stores, places of or
establishments that provide entertainment, health care
facilities, shelters, government offices, youth service
providers including adoption and foster care providers, and
transportation. Forms of discrimination include the exclusion
and denial of entry, unequal or unfair treatment, harassment,
and violence. This discrimination prevents the full
participation of LGBTQ people in society and disrupts the free
flow of commerce.
(4) Women also have faced discrimination in many
establishments such as stores and restaurants, and places or
establishments that provide other goods or services, such as
entertainment or transportation, including sexual harassment,
differential pricing for substantially similar products and
services, and denial of services because they are pregnant or
breastfeeding.
(5) Many employers already and continue to take proactive
steps, beyond those required by some States and localities, to
ensure they are fostering positive and respectful cultures for
all employees. Many places of public accommodation also
recognize the economic imperative to offer goods and services
to as many consumers as possible.
(6) Regular and ongoing discrimination against LGBTQ
people, as well as women, in accessing public accommodations
contributes to negative social and economic outcomes, and in
the case of public accommodations operated by State and local
governments, abridges individuals' constitutional rights.
(7) The discredited practice known as ``conversion
therapy'' is a form of discrimination that harms LGBTQ people
by undermining individuals' sense of self-worth, increasing
suicide ideation and substance abuse, exacerbating family
conflict, and contributing to second-class status.
(8) Both LGBTQ people and women face widespread
discrimination in employment and various services, including by
entities that receive Federal financial assistance. Such
discrimination--
(A) is particularly troubling and inappropriate for
programs and services funded wholly or in part by the
Federal Government;
(B) undermines national progress toward equal
treatment regardless of sex, sexual orientation, or
gender identity; and
(C) is inconsistent with the constitutional
principle of equal protection under the Fourteenth
Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
(9) Federal courts have widely recognized that, in enacting
the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Congress validly invoked its
powers under the Fourteenth Amendment to provide a full range
of remedies in response to persistent, widespread, and
pervasive discrimination by both private and government actors.
(10) Discrimination by State and local governments on the
basis of sexual orientation or gender identity in employment,
housing, and public accommodations, and in programs and
activities receiving Federal financial assistance, violates the
Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the
Constitution of the United States. In many circumstances, such
discrimination also violates other constitutional rights such
as those of liberty and privacy under the due process clause of
the Fourteenth Amendment.
(11) Individuals who are LGBTQ, or are perceived to be
LGBTQ, have been subjected to a history and pattern of
persistent, widespread, and pervasive discrimination on the
bases of sexual orientation and gender identity by both private
sector and Federal, State, and local government actors,
including in employment, housing, and public accommodations,
and in programs and activities receiving Federal financial
assistance. This discrimination inflicts a range of tangible
and intangible harms, sometimes even including serious physical
injury or death. An explicit and comprehensive national
solution is needed to address this discrimination, including
the full range of remedies available under the Civil Rights Act
of 1964.
(12) Discrimination based on sexual orientation includes
discrimination based on an individual's actual or perceived
romantic, emotional, physical, or sexual attraction to other
persons, or lack thereof, on the basis of gender. LGBTQ people,
including gender nonbinary people, also commonly experience
discrimination because of sex-based stereotypes. Many people
are subjected to discrimination because of others' perceptions
or beliefs regarding their sexual orientation. Even if these
perceptions are incorrect, the identity imputed by others forms
the basis of discrimination.
(13) Numerous provisions of Federal law expressly prohibit
discrimination on the basis of sex, and Federal courts and
agencies have correctly interpreted these prohibitions on sex
discrimination to include discrimination based on sexual
orientation, gender identity, and sex stereotypes. In
particular, the Supreme Court of the United States correctly
held in Bostock v. Clayton County, 140 S. Ct. 1731 (2020) that
the prohibition on employment discrimination because of sex
under title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 inherently
includes discrimination because of sexual orientation or
transgender status.
(14) This Act makes explicit that existing Federal statutes
prohibiting sex discrimination in employment (including in
access to benefits), healthcare, housing, education, credit,
and jury service also prohibit sexual orientation and gender
identity discrimination.
(15) LGBTQ people often face discrimination when seeking to
rent or purchase housing, as well as in every other aspect of
obtaining and maintaining housing. LGBTQ people in same-sex
relationships are often discriminated against when two names
associated with one gender appear on a housing application, and
transgender people often encounter discrimination when credit
checks or inquiries reveal a former name.
(16) National surveys, including a study commissioned by
the Department of Housing and Urban Development, show that
housing discrimination against LGBTQ people is very prevalent.
For instance, when same-sex couples inquire about housing that
is available for rent, they are less likely to receive positive
responses from landlords. A national matched-pair testing
investigation found that nearly one-half of same-sex couples
had encountered adverse, differential treatment when seeking
elder housing. According to other studies, transgender people
have half the homeownership rate of non-transgender people and
about 1 in 5 transgender people experience homelessness.
Another survey found that 82 percent of gender nonbinary people
experiencing homelessness lacked access to shelter.
(17) As a result of the absence of explicit prohibitions
against discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and
gender identity, credit applicants who are LGBTQ, or are
perceived to be LGBTQ, have unequal opportunities to establish
credit. LGBTQ people can experience being denied a mortgage,
credit card, student loan, or many other types of credit simply
because of their sexual orientation or gender identity.
(18) Numerous studies demonstrate that LGBTQ people,
especially transgender people and women, are economically
disadvantaged and at a higher risk for poverty compared with
other groups of people. For example, the poverty rate for older
women in same-sex couples is twice that of older different-sex
couples.
(19) The right to an impartial jury of one's peers and the
reciprocal right to jury service are fundamental to the free
and democratic system of justice in the United States and are
based in the Bill of Rights. There is, however, an unfortunate
and long-documented history in the United States of attorneys
discriminating against LGBTQ individuals, or those perceived to
be LGBTQ, in jury selection. Failure to bar peremptory
challenges based on the actual or perceived sexual orientation
or gender identity of an individual not only erodes a
fundamental right, duty, and obligation of being a citizen of
the United States, but also unfairly creates a second class of
citizenship for LGBTQ victims, witnesses, plaintiffs, and
defendants.
(20) Numerous studies document the shortage of qualified
and available homes for the approximately 424,000 youth in the
child welfare system and the negative outcomes for the many
youth who live in group care as opposed to a loving home or who
age out of care without a permanent family placement. Although
same-sex couples are 7 times more likely to foster or adopt
than their different-sex counterparts, many child-placing
agencies refuse to serve same-sex couples and LGBTQ
individuals. This has resulted in a reduction of the pool of
qualified and available homes for youth in the child welfare
system who need placement on a temporary or permanent basis. It
also sends a negative message about LGBTQ people to children
and youth in the child welfare system about who is, and who is
not, considered fit to be a parent. While the priority should
be on providing the supports necessary to keep children with
their families, when removal is required, barring
discrimination in foster care and adoption will increase the
number of homes available to foster children waiting for foster
and adoptive families.
(21) LGBTQ youth are overrepresented in the foster care
system by at least a factor of two and report twice the rate of
poor treatment while in care compared to their non-LGBTQ
counterparts. LGBTQ youth in foster care have a higher average
number of placements, higher likelihood of living in a group
home, and higher rates of hospitalization for emotional reasons
and of juvenile justice involvement than their non-LGBTQ peers
because of the high level of bias and discrimination that they
face and the difficulty of finding affirming foster placements.
Further, due to their physical distance from friends and
family, traumatic experiences, and potentially unstable living
situations, all youth involved with child welfare services are
at risk for being targeted by traffickers seeking to exploit
children. Barring discrimination in child welfare services will
ensure improved treatment and outcomes for LGBTQ foster
children.
(22) Courts consistently have found that the government has
a compelling interest in preventing and remedying
discrimination. For example, the Supreme Court of the United
States found there to be a compelling government interest in
eliminating sex discrimination in Board of Directors of Rotary
International v. Rotary Club of Duarte, 481 U.S. 537, 549
(1987). Because discrimination based on sexual orientation or
gender identity inherently is a form of sex discrimination, as
held in Bostock v. Clayton County, 140 S. Ct. 1731 (2020), this
Act furthers the compelling government interest in providing
redress for the serious harms to mental and physical health,
financial security and well-being, civic participation, freedom
of movement and opportunity, personal dignity, and physical
safety that result from discrimination. Consistent with the
role nondiscrimination laws play in protecting lives and
livelihoods, alleviating suffering, and improving individual
and public health, the Supreme Court of the United States has
long recognized, under the decision in Heart of Atlanta Motel,
Inc. v. United States, 379 U.S. 241 (1964), that these laws
also benefit society as a whole by ending the ``disruptive
effect'' discrimination has on travel and commerce, and by
creating a level field for all participants in a given sector.
(23) As with all prohibitions on invidious discrimination,
this Act furthers the government's compelling interest in the
least restrictive way because only by forbidding discrimination
is it possible to avert or redress the harms described in this
subsection.
(b) Purpose.--It is the purpose of this Act to expand as well as
clarify, confirm and create greater consistency in the protections and
remedies against discrimination on the basis of all covered
characteristics and to provide guidance and notic