Maine Republicans have put forward two bills in recent days to remove the language in the Maine Human Rights Act’s (MHRA) which lays the legal basis of Governor Janet Mills (D) pretext for refusing to comply with a White House executive order to protect girls’ school sports.

The specific language in the MHRA includes “gender identity” as a class protected against discrimination, and was added to the state’s human rights law in 2005.

“Every piece of legislation we brought forward, the argument’s always the Maine Human Rights Act. Taking the term ‘gender identity’ out of the Maine Human Rights Act puts an end to it all,” said Rep. Mike Soboleski (R-Phillips), the sponsor of one of the bills, speaking during a press conference on Monday announcing the bill.

Rep. Soboleski’s bill, LD 1432, drew co-sponsorships from nine Republicans, including Senate Minority Leader Trey Stewart (R-Aroostook), Assistant House Republican Leader Katrina Smith (R-Palermo), and Rep. Reagan Paul (R-Winterport).

The simple bill would remove any mention of “gender identity” from the MHRA, while preserving all other aspects of the anti-discrimination law. Under Soboleski’s bill, it would remain illegal to discriminate on the basis of immutable traits such as race or sex, but mutable gender identity would no longer be considered a protected class.

The removal of those protections would eliminate one of the primary arguments made by state authorities in favor of their refusal to comply with President Donald Trump’s executive order demanding that transgender-identifying males not be allowed to compete in women’s sports.

The Maine Department of Education (MDOE) has argued that the MHRA’s current protections for transgender identity prevent them by law from complying with the president’s order.

With gender identity removed from the MHRA, the DOE would no longer have to contend with the alleged contradiction between state and federal law.

Soboleski’s bill appears poised to be considered by the Judiciary Committee, but no public hearing has been scheduled yet.

The other bill, LD 1337, from Rep. Elizabeth Caruso (R-Caratunk) also addresses the MHRA, though in a more limited way. Her bill drew co-sponsorships from nine Republicans, including Sen. Stewart and House Minority Leader Billy Bob Faulkingham (R-Winter Harbor).

Caruso’s bill, set to be considered in the Judiciary, removes privately owned emergency shelters specifically designed to house women concerned for their safety from the MHRA’s “place of public accommodation” clause. This change will allow women’s shelters to legally refuse to house males identifying as women.

The bill also amends the MHRA’s education discrimination section to clarify that it should not be construed to affect the rights of female athletes as laid out in the federal Title IX antidiscrimination laws.

Caruso’s bill is set to be considered in the Judiciary Committee, with no public hearing currently scheduled.

In a press conference on Tuesday that centered on concerns about Maine’s failure to comply with federal Title IX protections, legislative Republicans highlighted these bills as proposed solutions to the impasse between the state and the federal government, which threatens to cost Maine schools hundreds of millions of dollars in funding.

Both bills will face significant difficulties in the state’s Democrat-controlled legislature. Despite the challenges, they could allow Gov. Janet Mills (D-Maine), the MDOE, and the Maine Principals Association to comply with President Trump’s order, thereby averting a loss of federal education funds without violating state law.