removing all references of gender identity in New Hampshire statutes.
HB 1564 would remove references to “gender identity” from a broad range of New Hampshire statutes, while leaving one specified reference in RSA 332-M:2, III-a intact. The bill amends numerous laws touching state employment, municipal cable franchising, hate-crime reporting, police standards and profiling, mental health services, residential and home care rights, foster care, education, higher education, housing, civil rights, transportation network companies, insurance, jury service, and sentencing enhancements. It also repeals the statutory definition of gender identity in RSA 354-A:2 and a related provision in RSA 21:54, and sets an effective date of January 1, 2027.
In practical terms, the bill would remove gender identity as an express protected category from many anti-discrimination and related provisions in state law. Several of the affected sections currently prohibit discrimination in employment, housing, public accommodations, public education, health coverage, and state services, or include gender identity in hate-crime, bullying, and bias-related definitions. The bill would therefore alter the scope of protections and reporting language across multiple chapters of the Revised Statutes Annotated, and could also affect civil-rights enforcement and private causes of action tied to those provisions.
The fiscal note says the bill does not authorize new positions or appropriations, but any fiscal effect is indeterminable. The note suggests possible indirect savings or revenue changes if fewer civil cases are filed, since some of the amended statutes currently allow individuals to seek remedies for discrimination. The Judicial Branch estimates were included only to illustrate potential civil case costs and filing fees, not to assign a specific cost to the bill.
No committee transcript or recorded vote information was provided, so there is no direct evidence of debate, support, or opposition in the materials supplied. Based on the bill text alone, the measure appears to be a significant policy change in the area of civil rights and gender-related protections, and it would likely be viewed as controversial because it narrows or removes gender-identity references from many existing anti-discrimination laws and related protections.
The bill would make sweeping statutory changes by striking references to gender identity from dozens of provisions across state law and repealing the standalone statutory definition of gender identity. This would affect anti-discrimination rules in employment, housing, public accommodations, education, health care, transportation, insurance, and state services, as well as hate-crime, bullying, and profiling provisions that currently include gender identity among protected or referenced categories. It would also remove gender identity from some enforcement and remedial frameworks under the Law Against Discrimination, potentially narrowing the basis for complaints, investigations, and civil actions tied to those statutes.
No committee discussion or vote history was provided, so there is no documented legislative sentiment in the supplied materials. From the bill’s structure and subject matter, the proposal appears to be a major and likely contentious change to civil-rights law, with the likely effect of reducing explicit statutory protections for gender identity. The fiscal note is neutral and limited, indicating no direct appropriations and only indeterminable indirect fiscal effects.
The central point of contention is the removal of gender identity from anti-discrimination and related protections across many areas of law. Supporters would likely view the bill as a statutory cleanup or policy reversal that eliminates gender-identity references from state law, while opponents would likely argue that it strips explicit protections from transgender and gender-diverse people in employment, housing, education, health care, public accommodations, and hate-crime reporting. The bill also raises concern because it repeals the definition of gender identity and changes language in statutes that currently support civil remedies and agency enforcement, which could affect both private litigants and state agencies.