CHARLESTON — A West Virginia House of Delegates committee took up multiple bills Monday tackling issues important to conservative Republicans but opposed by Democratic lawmakers.
The House Judiciary Committee recommended three bills for passage to the full House Monday afternoon that had wide support from the Republican majority but not without opposition by Democratic committee members.
House Bill 2007 would prohibit a physician from providing irreversible gender reassignment surgery to a person who is under 18 years of age. An amendment adopted by the committee also added a prohibition on using medication for gender affirming care, such as hormones or puberty blockers.
“We know that there are questions here about irreversible … catastrophic gender mutilation of a 5-year-old, a 10-year-old, a 16-year-old that’s not even endowed with the decision to go get a tattoo, and we’re going to sit here and act like that person can make a decision that they want radical surgery to change their genitalia,” said. Del. Mike Honaker, R-Greenbrier. “The intent of this legislation is to protect children until they are adults and can make their own decisions.”
According to the Kaiser Family Foundation, four states enacted laws last year limiting access to gender affirming care, which can involve surgery or the use of medications, such as puberty blockers and hormone treatments. Alabama, Arkansas, Texas, and Arizona have such bans in place, though injunctions are blocking enforcement of Alabama, Arkansas, Texas’ laws pending the outcome of litigation.
According to KFF, 15 states introduced 25 bills in 2022 to restrict access to gender affirming care, and in some cases putting in place criminal penalties on parents and medical providers for providing care in violation of laws. Several healthcare organizations, including the American Medical Association, oppose these bills.
“The AMA opposes the dangerous intrusion of government into the practice of medicine and the criminalization of health care decision-making,” said Dr. Michael Suk, an AMA board member in a 2021 statement. “Gender-affirming care is medically-necessary, evidence-based care that improves the physical and mental health of transgender and gender-diverse people.”
The bill was opposed by Democratic lawmakers on the committee who criticized the Republican majority for not hearing from medical professionals and calling the bill an attempt at bullying transgender youth.
“I was always told that when you see people who are being bullied, you’ve got to stand up for them,” said Del. Joey Garcia, D-Marion. “The legislation itself is something that bullies people, that stigmatizes people. This type of legislation can cause people, I think, to commit suicide and to lose hope. That’s why I can’t be for it.”
“I know there is a general sentiment and a distrust of experts and distrust of people with hoity-toity degrees, but I actually care what the major medical associations think on an issue like this,” said Del. Evan Hansen, D-Monongalia. “This is about survival for kids who are losing hope. Even discussing this has a negative impact on our children. If we are to pass a bill like this, it would be even more catastrophic.”
House Bill 2008 would require local entities to enforce federal immigration laws. The bill would prohibit local governments from adopting ordinances, resolutions, rules, regulations, or policies that would prohibit the enforcement of immigration laws. The bill would also fine local governments a monthly $10,000 for each incidence of knowing harboring illegal immigrants.
“Speaking from 47 years of law enforcement as a police officer and as a magistrate, our local police do not go out hunting immigrants,” said Del. Keith Marple, R-Harrison. “Our local police find these immigrants when they have violated one of our laws and they’re not able to provide proper documentation as being a citizen of this country, so I’m in favor of this law.”
An amendment from the committee was adopted making numerous changes and additions, including creating a complaint procedure for federal immigration authorities to notify the Attorney General’s Office of non-compliance by local governments and institutions with the law, which can file suit. The amendment would also prohibit state funds from going to local governments, state agencies, or other public entities in non-compliance.
According to the Center for Immigration Studies, sanctuary cities are defined as any local government entity that has laws or ordinances in place to obstruct enforcement of federal immigration laws or prohibit cooperation with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. But as of October, there are no counties or cities in West Virginia that have identified as sanctuaries for illegal immigrants.
According to U.S. Customs and Border Protection, officers had more than 250,000 encounters with illegal border crossers in December, breaking previous records for the last 12 months and the average number of encounters for fiscal years 2013-2020 of 43,447.
“This is a very, very important issue to West Virginians,” said Del. Criss Pritt, R-Kanawha. “This is a very, very important issue to the United States of America. It has to do with our sovereignty. It has to do with our security. This is one way we can ensure that we being proactive on a very, very important issue and that we are doing everything possible to ensure the safety of our citizens.”
The committee also recommended a bill that would prevent the use of payment card processing systems for surveillance of firearms purchases and purchases of certain firearms accessories.
House Bill 2004, also called the Second Amendment Financial Privacy Act, would prohibit financial institutions from disclosing financial records that single out state residents for their purchases of firearms. It would also prohibit state/local government entities from being required to disclosure similar financial records.
Exceptions include valid warrants for criminal investigations, certain subpoenas, and if the customer provides written consent. The bill creates civil penalties for companies that violate the bill’s provisions. A financial institution could also be disqualified from bidding on state contracts if the company has violated the provisions of the bill in a five-year period.
The bill is in response to a September 2022 announcement by MasterCard, American Express, and Visa that it would assign a specific merchant code to firearms purchases following a request by U.S. Sen, Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., and U.S. Rep. Madeleine Dean, D-Pa.
“A new (merchant category code) code could make it easier for financial institutions to monitor certain types of suspicious activities including straw purchases and unlawful bulk purchases that could be used in the commission of domestic terrorist acts or gun trafficking schemes,” Warren and Dean wrote. “Such coordination between financial institutions and law enforcement has been instrumental in efforts across the federal government to identify and prevent illicit activity.”
“The new Merchant Category Code will allow the banks, payment card networks, acquirers, and other entities involved in payment card processing to identify and separately track lawful payment card purchases at firearms retailers in West Virginia, paving the way for both unprecedented surveillance of Second Amendment activity and unprecedented information sharing between financial institutions and the government,” according to the bill’s findings and intent.
(function(d, s, id) {
var js, fjs = d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];
if (d.getElementById(id)) return;
js = d.createElement(s); js.id = id;
js.src = “//connect.facebook.net/en_US/sdk.js#xfbml=1&appId=152048938164494&version=v2.0”;
fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js, fjs);
}(document, ‘script’, ‘facebook-jssdk’));
