Democrats’ new ‘Trans Bill of Rights’ looks to undo Trump protections for women’s spaces

A group of Democrats recently unveiled their “Trans Bill of Rights,” which conservatives claim would undo many of President Donald Trump’s efforts to protect female-only spaces.

The “Trans Bill of Rights” claims to push back against the “fear” and “hatred” propelled by those who believe that one’s sex corresponds to their biological sex. One of the original co-sponsors, Rep. Seth Moulton, D-Mass., said in a press release that the resolution aims to direct the federal government to expand transgender access to public “services” and “accommodations.”

The legislation aims to ensure that “transgender and non-binary people” get “equal access” to “services and public accommodations that align with their gender identity.”

The bill also states that people who claim to be transgender should be allowed to access “the full range of places and services that members of the general public utilize.”

The bill does not explicitly specify what public “accommodations” would be impacted by the legislation, however.

While several of the main Democrats pushing the “Trans Bill of Rights,” did not respond to The Daily Signal’s request for comment, conservative policy experts believe making the “Trans Bill of Rights” law would destroy female-only spaces.

Jay Richards, vice president of Social and Domestic Policy at the Heritage Foundation, told The Daily Signal that the “public accommodations” in question could include women’s bathrooms, locker rooms and personal spaces.

“I’m certain that’s what the drafters intend,” Richards told The Daily Signal.

Other provisions include allowing taxpayer funded transition surgeries and abortion. it would also require institutions to recognize one’s gender identity, or lack thereof, as a legitimate biological gender, which Richards considered to be harmful.

“The bill would promote experimental, body-altering interventions for minors,” Richards stated.

Senior Policy Analyst at the Heritage Foundation Laura Hanford echoed Richard’s remarks and told The Daily Signal that by allowing gender affirming care to take place, this “Bill of Rights” could further harm children.

“They will continue to try and portray the Administration’s actions as excessive in an effort to make themselves look like they are protecting those they are, in fact, harming,” Hanford said. “This ‘Bill of Right’ is an effort to continue to claim that erasing woman and harming children is a ‘right’ to protect rather than an excess to abolish.”

In November, the Department of Health and Human Services described gender affirming care as “sex rejecting procedures” that pose “medical dangers” to “children.”

Even though the Trump administration has fought to eliminate transgender ideology and gender affirming care procedures, Hanford and others worry that those actions could be reversed under a future Democrat administration.

“While the Trump Administration has secured tremendous gains such as gender clinics pausing sex-rejecting procedures, these can readily be reversed in a new administration,” Hanford said.

The Trump administration has aggressively pushed to reverse the progressive transgender ideology that pervaded former President Joe Biden’s administration.

In Feb. 2025, President Donald Trump signed an executive order that banned biological males from competing in federally funded women’s sports.

Trump argued that allowing men who identify as women in women’s sports is a direct violation of Title IX of the Education Act of 1972, which states that educational institutions receiving federal funds cannot deny women an equal opportunity to participate in sports.

Congress has also voted on key legislation surrounding transgender ideology.

Last year, the House passed Rep. Greg Steube’s, R-Fla., Protection of Women and Girls in Sports Act.

“Men have no place in women’s sports,” Steube wrote in a statement. “Republicans have promised to protect women’s sports, and under President Trump’s leadership, we will fulfill this promise.”

[Editor’s note: This story originally was published by The Daily Signal.]