The groups backing the initiative say the public accommodations bill is broadly worded and allows individuals to access bathrooms or locker rooms of the opposite sex. Supporters of the 2016 law say there isn’t one incident of assault or invasion of privacy that has occurred as a result of the law.
Due to potential confusion due to the required wording of the referendum, Galvin noted that a “yes” vote on Question 3 would actually keep in place the current law prohibiting discrimination on the basis of gender identity in public places. Meanwhile, a “no” vote would repeal that part of the law.
