Key Points:

• Arizona Senator John Kavanagh plans to take bathroom bill measures directly to voters
• Kavanagh’s legislation would require students to use bathrooms matching their assigned gender at birth
• Kavanagh’s legislation includes a “reasonable accommodation” for students with different needs

Unable to get his measures about who can use what bathroom past Gov. Katie Hobbs, a Fountain Hills Republican senator is planning an end-run.

John Kavanagh told Capitol Media Services he wants to go directly to voters to ask them to approve legislation that spells out that students in public and charter schools can use only the bathroom that matches the gender they were assigned at birth. The same rule would also apply to locker rooms and showers.

And students on field trips would also only be able to share rooms with those whose “biological sex as determined by anatomy and genetics existing at the time of the person’s birth.”

And that’s just one part of what the Republican senator has planned for the 2026 ballot.

Another Hobbs-vetoed bill dealing with sex and gender identity is back.

This one bars school employees and contractors from addressing a student younger than 18 by “a pronoun that differs from the pronoun that aligns with the student’s biological sex.”

There is, however, an exception. Teachers and others could use “he” and “she,” regardless of the student’s biology, as long as the school first obtained written permission from the student’s parents.

Then there’s an exception to the exception. Parental permission or not, Kavanagh’s legislation says it cannot be used to require a school employee or contractor to use that preferred pronoun if that would be contrary to the person’s “religious or moral convictions.”

Kavanagh should have little problem getting both of those referred to the ballot by the Republican-controlled Legislature.

Both have previously been approved on party-line votes, only to meet with the governor’s veto pen.

In 2023, her first year in office, she blasted the bill about bathrooms and more as “yet another discriminatory act against LGBTQ+ youth passed by the majority at the state Legislature.” And the Democratic governor called the pronoun bill “harmful legislation directed at transgender youth.”

Kavanagh, however, said he believes Hobbs is out of step with what most voters want.

“All the polls I’ve seen totally back my position, like 80-20,” he said.

This isn’t Kavanagh’s first foray into what’s become known as the “bathroom bill,” just the latest in a multi-year effort to see gender regulations in Arizona’s schools. 

As far back as 2012, Kavanagh actually sought to make it a crime for someone to use a restroom, shower, or locker room in any public establishment — including businesses — that does not match that person’s biological gender. His measure even sought to make it a crime, with penalties up to six months in jail.

That died after encountering various problems, including questions about whether customers would have to carry a birth certificate.

A modified version sought to give business owners immunity from civil and criminal prosecution if they turned someone away from a restroom based on the owner’s or manager’s belief that the person should not be using that facility. That version fared no better.

Since then, Kavanagh has focused on school children and who gets to be in places where students may be in various states of undress.

“Human beings have an innate sense of modesty,” the senator said earlier this year in pushing the proposal on bathrooms, locker rooms and showers. “This bill simply respects that basic human sense of privacy for the same gender in these kinds of situations.”

But his plan does include an escape clause of sorts designed to recognize that there may be situations where the “assigned” bathroom and the “assigned” sex don’t match.

It requires schools to provide a “reasonable accommodation” to any person who is “unwilling or unable” to use a multi-occupancy restroom or changing facility that is designated for that person’s biological sex and makes a request in writing. Kavanagh said he envisions it taking the form of a teacher’s restroom, lounge, or any other single-occupancy restroom or changing facility.

There are teeth in the measure.

On one hand, someone denied such an accommodation would have the right to sue. The only defense would be if the school can demonstrate that providing that accommodation “would cause an undue hardship.”

Conversely, the parents or relatives of a student who encountered someone of the opposite sex in a single-sex restroom or locker room would have the right to sue the school.

House Minority Leader Oscar De Los Santos said that Kavanagh’s plan to send the issues directly to voters doesn’t make either concept more acceptable.

“Democrats believe every Arizonan deserves freedom, dignity, and equality,” he told Capitol Media Services.

More to the point, the Laveen Democrat called it all a diversionary tactic.

“Republicans are pushing divisive culture wants because they don’t want to talk about the reality: They’ve raised costs, cut health care, and left our public schools in crisis,” he said, accusing GOP lawmakers of “choosing chaos over solutions.”

Democrats also have registered specific objections during prior debates.

Rep. Nancy Gutierrez, speaking earlier this year about the pronoun bill, said that addressing issues like gender can be an important part of growing up for some students.

“All it is are kids exploring who they are, and that is a good thing,” said the Tucson Democrat who is a high school teacher. She said that for students who might be fearful of being thrown out of their home because they are gay or transgender, having teachers and other school staff support them is critical. 

“So can we please just respect our young students and allow them this,” she said during a debate on the bill banning different pronouns. “I promise you, they need to feel respected in school.” 

But Rep. Lisa Fink, R-Glendale, said the measure simply respects parents’ right to have ultimate authority over the upbringing and education of their children.

“What we’re seeing is that, yes, many of these kids do present with a mental health challenge, but it’s being hidden from the parents,” Fink said. “Parents need to know and need to understand if their child is having some difficulties, that they have the ultimate responsibility, not the school, in transitioning these children.”

The bathroom bill drew different criticism from Rep. Patty Contreras.

“SB 1003 takes direct aim at transgender students by restricting their ability to use restrooms and other facilities,” said the Phoenix Democrat. “While these bills are designed to ensure student safety, they stigmatize our transgender students, putting them more in harm’s way.”

And Contreras said the bill is unnecessary.

“Just let these people go relieve themselves,” she said. “Let the students, let the adults, let the transgender folks go to the bathroom where they feel they need to go.”

The merits of either proposal aside, there’s also a political factor at work here.

Hobbs herself is on the 2026 ballot in what could be a tough reelection effort. Having the bathroom and pronoun bills on the same ballot would remind voters that she opposes them. 

In fact, while the governor nixed both measures again earlier this year, her verbiage was far different than the 2023 veto messages. This time, Hobbs didn’t even discuss the specifics of either proposal or what she didn’t like about them.

“This bill will not increase opportunity, security or freedom for Arizonans,” she wrote in identical veto messages to both bills. “I encourage the legislature to join with me in prioritizing legislation that will lower costs, protect the border, create jobs, and secure our water future.”

And De Los Santos said he doesn’t see these measures as sure winners for Republicans — either in getting approved or in using them to attack Democratic candidates.

“Voters aren’t buying the fear mongering,” he said. “They want leaders focused on lowering costs and improving healthcare, not stoking needless culture wars.”