N.C.’s ‘restroom’ law is unjustified

Let’s define North Carolina’s so-called “restroom” legislation as what it really is: a bill to allow continued discrimination throughout the state against the LGBT community.

And that’s bad news not only for North Carolina but also the entire region.

The bill, which was adopted last week during a special legislative session and then signed into law by Republican Gov. Pat McCrory, was a response to an ordinance passed by the city of Charlotte that banned unequal treatment of gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people. The new state law not only squelches Charlotte’s anti-discrimination efforts but also forbids any other local government in the state from adopting similar measures.

Charlotte’s ordinance contained broad sanctions against discrimination in the workplace and in public accommodations. But the focus of the opposition narrowed to the most provocative aspect of the measure, one that centered on transgender people.

Proponents of the state bill used the issue of access to public restrooms to stir up support. Charlotte’s ordinance would have enabled people to choose the men’s or women’s restroom depending on their personal gender identity, not their sex at birth.

McCrory and others claimed that the ordinance would have resulted in a breach of privacy if transgender people were allowed to choose a restroom at will. The new law specifies that all are required to use restrooms based on the gender listed on their birth certificates.

Much like the false hype surrounding voter fraud that was used to pass oppressive voter ID legislation in the state, the new restroom regulation also is a solution in search of a problem. We are aware of little, if any, documentation of instances in which the use of a public restroom or locker room caused a problem or resulted in accusations of privacy violations.

Take it a step further: Who is going to police this law? Will people be required to show their birth certificates before entering a North Carolina restroom? The idea is absurd.

The voter ID law wasn’t about protecting the sanctity of the vote; it was about suppressing the vote among residents least likely to have proper ID, namely African-Americans.

Likewise, the new state law isn’t about privacy in the stalls of public restrooms; it’s about stifling local governments that try to expand anti-discrimination protections based on sexual orientation and gender identity.

In past years, this sort of institutionalized bigotry might have been accepted by the majority with a wink and a nod. But times have changed, and lawmakers and state leaders are being challenged by the public and, in particular, by business leaders throughout the state and nationwide.

Two transgender people and a lesbian law professor at N.C. Central University filed a lawsuit against the law in federal court Monday. They are supported by representatives from the ACLU of North Carolina, Lambda Legal and Equality NC.

A variety of businesses also have lodged formal complaints about the new law. Tech giants Apple, Google and Facebook, each of which runs massive data-processing complexes in western North Carolina, officially objected to the law.

So did American Airlines, which has one of its largest hubs in Charlotte, Bank of America, whose headquarters are in Charlotte, IBM, PayPal, Dow Chemical, Biogen and Bayer.

San Francisco’s mayor banned city workers from non-essential travel to North Carolina, saying his city would not “subsidize legally sanctioned discrimination.”

Officials with the NBA hinted that the law might affect the league’s decision to hold the 2017 All-Star game in Charlotte. The NCAA said the law could have an impact when considering sites for future NCAA events.

The effects of these corporate decisions won’t be confined to North Carolina. Surrounding states, including South Carolina – and York County, in particular –also would feel the economic tremors.

But while economic concerns are a good reason to oppose this bill, a better reason is that the bill is fundamentally mean-spirited, unfair and unsuited to a changing society.

Even if state lawmakers are not inclined to enact legal protections for LGBT residents, they shouldn’t stand in the way of counties, municipalities, school boards and other local governments that want to do so. We hope McCrory comes to regret signing a bill that so clearly was designed primarily to mollify his political base during an election year.

This story was originally published April 5, 2016 at 3:32 PM with the headline "N.C.’s ‘restroom’ law is unjustified."