A Missoula District Court judge on Thursday heard oral arguments in a case challenging a 2025 state law that could change how some Montanans use public bathrooms and other spaces. The lawsuit centers around House Bill 121, which requires public and some private facilities to enforce sex-segregat ed spaces for multiuser bathrooms, dormitories and locker rooms. It also creates a route for legal action against any qualifying facility that fails to comply with the law.   The plaintiffs include employees of state agencies and others, all of whom are transgender or intersex. On Thursday morning, their attorneys asked District Court Judge Leslie Halligan to strike the law entirely, arguing that it is discriminatory and violates Montana’s constitutional rights to privacy and due process. They also said the law is unconstitutionally vague in defining compliance. The ACLU of Montana, ACLU and Legal Voice, a nonprofit that advocates for gender justice, filed the lawsuit against the state on March 22, 2025,  the same day Gov. Greg Gianforte signed the bill into law. A month later, a district court judge temporarily blocked enforcement of the law while the case continues.  “This is sex discrimination because our clients are prevented based upon their sex from obtaining the same attributes of life that cisgender Montanans have,” said Robin Turner, an attorney arguing on behalf of the plaintiffs.  Turner said her clients will be harmed if they are required to use facilities that are misaligned with their identities.  “Casey Perkins is a transgender woman who would be required to use the men’s restroom,” Turner said of one of the plaintiffs. “She would be outed when being required to use it, and she’s testified to her fear of harassment and threats in those spaces.” Thane Johnson, representing the state, said the law is constitutional and asked the judge to uphold it. “I cannot think of a more noble goal than protecting girls and women in our most vulnerable spaces,” he told the judge. “For women who are victims of violent sexual crimes, it is just the sight of a person with a penis in a place of vulnerability, and it is like a psychological warfare.” Johnson said women and girls have a right to privacy and should be protected from victimization.  “This is not a conversation about anti anything,” he said. “It is a conversation, however, about being pro women and pro girls. It’s not about trans hate in any fashion for the state.” Responding to a question from Judge Halligan about how the law would be enforced, Johnson said that if a restroom user suspects a person of using a bathroom that does not match their biological sex, they will likely take a photo of the person with their cell phone as evidence. The facility where the incident occurred could then be sued “for not taking reasonable steps” to comply with the law, he said. Asked by the judge what those reasonable steps could be, Johnson replied, “That’s what the courts are going to have to decide.”  The hearing concluded after three hours of testimony. Halligan can rule to permanently strike down or uphold the law without the need for trial. She can also determine that the case should go to trial. The law remains enjoined pending further direction from the court.  The post District Court judge hears arguments on bathroom law appeared first on Montana Free Press. ...read more read less