Oklahoma Senate Bill SB219

Oklahoma 2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/3/25
• Refer: 2/4/25

Caption

Schools; requiring certain schools to make menstrual products available in certain restrooms. Effective date. Emergency.

Summary

SB 219 would require each Oklahoma school district and public charter school to provide menstrual products at no cost in school restrooms designated for females and in single-occupancy restrooms. The bill defines menstrual products as tampons and sanitary napkins used in connection with the menstrual cycle. It also includes an emergency clause and an effective date of July 1, 2025, though the emergency clause would make it effective upon passage and approval if enacted in that form. The measure creates a new section of law to be codified in Title 70 of the Oklahoma Statutes, which governs schools. Its practical effect would be to impose a statewide obligation on public school districts and charter schools to stock and make available these products in the specified restrooms at no cost to students. The bill does not specify funding, implementation standards, or enforcement mechanisms, leaving those details to school districts and charter schools unless addressed elsewhere in law or policy.

Impact

SB 219 would add a new statutory requirement in Title 70 for public school districts and public charter schools to provide free menstrual products in designated restrooms. It would affect school operations, procurement, and restroom stocking practices, and could create ongoing costs for districts and charter schools. The bill does not amend existing education provisions directly but establishes a new statewide mandate for student access to menstrual hygiene products.

Sentiment

The available legislative history shows limited recorded debate or voting information, so overall sentiment cannot be measured in detail. Based on the bill’s introduction and referral, the measure appears to have been treated as a straightforward school health and student-support proposal. The inclusion of an emergency clause suggests the sponsor viewed the issue as time-sensitive and important for immediate implementation.

Contention

No committee transcript or vote record is provided, so specific objections are not documented in the available materials. Potential points of contention, if raised, would likely involve the cost of supplying products, the scope of the mandate, and whether the requirement should apply only to female-designated and single-occupancy restrooms. Another possible issue is the absence of guidance on funding, storage, and administration, which could concern school districts responsible for implementation.