In a move that’s already drawing national attention, Colorado’s House of Representatives passed a controversial bill expanding protections for transgender individuals by classifying intentional misgendering and deadnaming as forms of “coercive control” in family court proceedings. The bill, HB25-1312, also mandates inclusive policies in schools and public agencies regarding pronouns, chosen names, and gendered dress codes.
But what’s happening in Colorado today could be Vermont’s legislative reality tomorrow.
A proposed constitutional amendment in Vermont—Proposal 4—was adopted by the state Senate and is now moving toward the 2026 ballot. If ratified by voters, the amendment would cement into the Vermont Constitution a requirement that government “shall not deny equal treatment and respect under the law” based on traits such as gender identity and gender expression. The full text of the amendment reflects a sweeping expansion of Article 7 and a new proposed Article 23 in Chapter I of the state constitution.
Colorado’s Legislative Shift
Nicknamed the “Kelly Loving Act,” HB25-1312 was introduced in response to the 2022 murder of a transgender woman during a mass shooting at Club Q in Colorado Springs. The bill redefines “coercive control” in child custody cases to include actions like misgendering or deadnaming a transgender person. Courts would be instructed to weigh such behavior as a factor when determining parental fitness and the best interests of the child.
Other provisions include:
- Prohibiting Colorado courts from enforcing out-of-state laws that penalize parents for allowing minors to receive gender-affirming care.
- Mandating schools to respect a student’s chosen name and pronouns and to allow students to dress according to their gender identity.
- Requiring public forms and institutions to provide a mechanism for individuals to submit and be addressed by their chosen names.
- Expanding the state’s anti-discrimination statutes to classify misgendering and deadnaming as discriminatory acts under the Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act.
The bill passed the House on April 6, 2025, and is currently awaiting consideration in the state Senate. With Democrats holding a majority, it is widely expected to pass.
Proposal 4: Vermont’s Precursor?
While Colorado’s law focuses on statutory changes, Vermont’s Proposal 4 seeks to amend the state’s Constitution itself, embedding broad anti-discrimination language that includes gender identity and expression. If ratified in 2026, it would effectively establish a constitutional mandate for laws and policies similar to those in HB25-1312.
According to Proposal 4:
“The State shall not deny equal treatment and respect under the law on account of a person’s race, ethnicity, sex, religion, disability, sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, or national origin.”
It further clarifies:
“Nothing in this Article shall be interpreted or applied to prevent the adoption or implementation of measures intended to provide equality of treatment and opportunity for members of groups that have historically been subject to discrimination.”
In other words, Vermont’s Constitution would not only prohibit unequal treatment—it would encourage affirmative policies, including those that prioritize gender identity and expression in family law, education, healthcare, and public accommodations.
What Could This Mean for Vermonters?
Critics of Colorado’s bill have raised concerns about compelled speech and parental rights. They argue that legally mandating affirmation of gender identity—especially in family law—opens the door to state overreach and interferes with free expression and parental discretion.
Proponents, however, frame the law as a necessary step to protect the dignity and safety of transgender individuals—especially youth. They point to studies linking gender affirmation with lower rates of depression and suicide, particularly in teens.
Vermont has already taken several steps toward similar policies:
- In 2023, Vermont passed a shield law protecting gender-affirming care providers from legal action initiated in states where such care is banned.
- The Vermont Human Rights Commission issued guidance clarifying that denying a student’s gender identity or pronouns could violate state anti-discrimination law.
- The Department of Motor Vehicles and Department of Health allow non-binary gender markers and simplified processes to amend identity documents.
With Proposal 4 looming on the 2026 ballot and no shortage of legislative interest in equity-based reforms, Vermont is well positioned to follow Colorado’s path—perhaps even expand on it.
Medical and Psychological Perspectives: Divided but Evolving
Major U.S. medical organizations—including the American Academy of Pediatrics, American Psychological Association, and American Medical Association—broadly support gender-affirming care and the use of chosen names and pronouns. They argue that affirmation improves mental health outcomes, particularly for youth experiencing gender dysphoria.
However, consensus does not mean unanimity. A growing number of clinicians—including some whistleblowers from U.S. gender clinics—have expressed concerns about rushed social and medical transitions, especially among minors. Meanwhile, countries like Sweden, Finland, and the UK have pulled back on automatic affirmation models, emphasizing comprehensive mental health evaluations and long-term follow-up.
As Vermont considers embedding gender identity protections into its constitution, these divergent models raise important questions: Should affirmation always be presumed best practice—or carefully assessed on a case-by-case basis? In the legal realm, the answer may soon carry constitutional weight.
Conclusion: Coming Soon?
While Proposal 4 still needs voter ratification, its language and intent are unambiguous. If passed, Vermont courts and lawmakers will be constitutionally empowered—and arguably obligated—to support policies that codify gender affirmation as a matter of equal protection.
For supporters, this marks a new chapter in civil rights law. For skeptics, it raises the specter of compelled affirmation and legal consequences for those who hesitate.
One thing’s clear: Vermont’s legal landscape is shifting, and what’s happening in Colorado may not be far behind.
Dave Soulia | FYIVT
You can find FYIVT on YouTube | X(Twitter) | Facebook | Parler (@fyivt) | Gab | Instagram
#fyivt #VermontPolitics #Proposal4 #GenderPolicy
Support Us for as Little as $5 – Get In The Fight!!
Make a Big Impact with $25/month—Become a Premium Supporter!
Join the Top Tier of Supporters with $50/month—Become a SUPER Supporter!
Leave a Reply