WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

HB 4066

Education: athletics; single-sex sports teams; require. Amends 1976 PA 451 (MCL 380.1 - 380.1852) by adding sec. 1290.

2025-2026 Regular Session Introduced by Greg Alexander and 29 co-sponsors

HB 4066 requires schools to classify teams by sex at birth and restrict female-only teams to those born female, limiting participation and enabling private suits.

REFERRED TO COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS
#education:athletics
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · HB 4066

Summary — HB 4066 (added Sec. 1290 to the Revised School Code)

Status: Passed House (May 22, 2025); referred to Committee on Government Operations
Introduced: March 7, 2025 (Rep. Jason Woolford, primary sponsor)
Companion: SB 2066. Related bill HB 4469 would amend the Elliott‑Larsen Civil Rights Act.

Purpose / Intent

HB 4066 requires local public K–12 school governing bodies (school districts, intermediate school districts, and public school academies/charters) that participate in interscholastic athletics to classify teams and sports by biological sex and to restrict participation on female‑only teams to those identified as female at birth. It also shields schools from certain external complaints or adverse actions for maintaining female‑only teams and creates private enforcement remedies.

Key provisions

  • Adds MCL 380.1290 to the Revised School Code. Boards must designate teams/sports as:
    • Females/women/girls
    • Males/men/boys
    • Coeducational/mixed
  • Defines “sex” (per the adopted substitute H‑1): the biological indication of male or female as listed on an individual’s original birth certificate issued at or near birth.
  • Prohibits a school, ISD, or PSA from knowingly allowing individuals of the male sex (per the birth certificate definition) to participate on teams or in competitions designated only for the female sex.
  • Clarifies the prohibition does not restrict eligibility for teams designated male or coeducational.
  • Bars state agencies, political subdivisions, accrediting organizations, or interscholastic athletic associations operating in Michigan from processing complaints, opening investigations, or taking adverse action against a school for maintaining female‑only teams.
  • Private causes of action:
    • A participant deprived of an athletic opportunity or harmed by a violation may sue for injunctive relief, damages, and other relief.
    • A participant who suffers retaliation for reporting a violation may sue.
    • A school or PSA harmed by an entity’s adverse action contrary to the bill may sue that entity.
  • Civil actions must be initiated within 2 years of the violation.

Who is affected

  • Local public school districts, intermediate school districts, and public school academies that operate interscholastic athletics.
  • Students (particularly transgender and gender‑diverse students) whose eligibility would be determined by sex assigned at birth per the bill’s definition.
  • State agencies and accrediting/athletic organizations operating in Michigan (restricted from certain enforcement actions against schools).
  • Local courts (potential increase in civil litigation).

Fiscal impact (House Fiscal Agency)

  • No direct state fiscal impact.
  • Potential administrative costs for districts/PSAs/ISDs to implement and verify eligibility; likely absorbed with existing staff.
  • Possible legal costs for districts that are sued and an indeterminate fiscal impact on local court funding units depending on litigation volume.
  • HB 4469 (related) would exempt institutions acting under HB 4066 from certain Elliott‑Larsen Civil Rights Act claims; the Department of Civil Rights might see an unknown increase in complaints related to gender expression but could likely handle them with existing resources.

Procedural / timeline notes

  • Reported favorably with substitute (H‑1) by committee (May 15, 2025).
  • Substitute (H‑1) adopted in House; bill passed the House with immediate effect (May 22, 2025).
  • Referred to Committee on Government Operations for further consideration.

Stakeholder positions (recorded)

  • Testimony in opposition: American Civil Liberties Union, Equality Michigan, Michigan League for Public Policy.
  • Additional organizations indicated opposition (e.g., Planned Parenthood, National Association of Social Workers, PFLAG local chapter, etc.).

This summary is based on the House Fiscal Agency analysis, committee reports, introduced and substituted bill texts, and recorded legislative actions through May 29, 2025.

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.