WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

HCR 5

REQUESTING THE UNITED STATES CONGRESS TO PASS LEGISLATION TO AMEND THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT OF 1964 TO PROHIBIT DISCRIMINATION ON THE BASIS OF SEX, SEXUAL ORIENTATION, AND GENDER IDENTITY IN EMPLOYMENT, HOUSING, PUBLIC ACCOMMODATIONS, EDUCATION, FEDERALLY FUNDED PROGRAMS, CREDIT, AND JURY SERVICE.

2026 Regular Session Introduced by Terez Amato and 6 co-sponsors

Hawaii legislature urges Congress to amend Civil Rights Act 1964 to explicitly prohibit discrimination based on sex, sexual orientation, and gender identity in employment, housing, and public services.

Offered
#federalequalityact #sex #andgenderidentity #sexualorientation
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · HCR 5

Legislative bill overview

HCR 5 is a Hawaii state resolution requesting that the U.S. Congress amend the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to explicitly prohibit discrimination based on sex, sexual orientation, and gender identity across employment, housing, public accommodations, education, federally funded programs, credit, and jury service. As a concurrent resolution, it expresses the state legislature's position rather than creating binding law.

Why is this important

This request addresses a significant gap in federal civil rights protections. Currently, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 does not explicitly prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity in most covered areas, though recent court decisions have extended some sex-discrimination protections to LGBTQ+ individuals. Passage would create uniform nationwide protections and eliminate existing legal uncertainty in states without their own comprehensive protections.

Potential points of contention

  • Religious exemptions debate: Disagreement over how broadly religious organizations should be exempted from non-discrimination requirements in their operations
  • Definition disputes: Differing views on how "sex," "sexual orientation," and "gender identity" should be defined and applied, particularly regarding trans status and documentation
  • Federal vs. state authority: Philosophical disagreement about whether Congress should impose nationwide employment and housing standards versus allowing states to set their own policies
  • Business compliance concerns: Private sector concerns about operational costs and legal liability under expanded definitions
  • Constitutional questions: Ongoing legal debate about Commerce Clause limits and whether certain applications might conflict with other constitutional protections

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

Sign in to ask a question.