Texas Lawmaker Introduces Controversial “Gender Identity Fraud” Bill

In early March 2025, Texas State Representative Tom Oliverson, a Republican from the Houston area, stirred debate by introducing House Bill 3817, a measure that seeks to criminalize what he calls “gender identity fraud.” The bill, filed on March 10, would make it a state jail felony for individuals to knowingly misrepresent their biological sex—defined strictly as the sex assigned at birth—on official state documents or to employers. If passed, the penalty could include up to two years in jail and a fine of up to $10,000. This legislation emerges as part of a broader wave of anti-transgender policies in Texas, a state already known for its restrictive stance on transgender rights.

Oliverson’s proposal comes at a time when Texas agencies have tightened rules around gender markers on identification documents. For years, the state has barred transgender individuals from updating their birth certificates or driver’s licenses to reflect their gender identity. More recently, the Texas Attorney General’s office has taken steps to invalidate court orders that previously allowed such changes. Against this backdrop, House Bill 3817 represents an escalation, aiming to penalize transgender individuals not just for official documentation but also for everyday interactions, such as disclosing their gender to a boss or coworker. The bill’s language is broad, raising questions about how it might be enforced and what it could mean for personal privacy.

The introduction of this bill is hardly an isolated event. According to Equality Texas, a leading advocacy group, nearly 170 anti-LGBTQ bills have been proposed in the state during the 2025 legislative session alone. Oliverson himself has a track record of supporting such measures, having previously backed efforts to limit transgender youth access to gender-affirming care and restrict their participation in sports aligned with their gender identity. His latest proposal, however, stands out for its punitive approach, framing transgender identity as a form of deception that warrants criminal punishment.

Critics have been quick to denounce the bill. Transgender advocates argue that it endangers an already vulnerable population by effectively forcing individuals to out themselves in situations where safety could be at risk. Imagine a transgender woman, for instance, compelled to disclose her birth sex to an employer in a conservative workplace—such a requirement could invite harassment or worse. Legal experts, including Brian Klosterboer of the ACLU of Texas, have called the measure “extreme” and predicted it would face significant constitutional challenges if it became law. They point to potential violations of free speech and equal protection under the U.S. Constitution, suggesting that courts would likely scrutinize the bill’s intent and impact.

Despite the controversy, House Bill 3817 faces an uphill battle in the Texas Legislature. As of its filing, it lacks co-sponsors, a sign of limited support even among fellow Republicans. Legislative analysts consider it a low-priority item in a session dominated by other issues, such as property taxes and border security. Still, its mere introduction highlights a growing trend of anti-transgender rhetoric and policy proposals, not just in Texas but across the United States. For many, it’s a stark reminder of the political climate transgender individuals navigate daily—a climate where their existence is increasingly politicized and policed.

For those watching from San Antonio, this bill underscores broader tensions around identity and rights in Texas. While it may not pass, its implications ripple beyond Austin, touching on questions of personal freedom and legal accountability. For a San Antonio Assault Attorney, this is particularly relevant: if such a law were enacted, it could lead to disputes or confrontations in workplaces or public spaces, potentially increasing cases of harassment or assault tied to gender identity disclosures. In a city with a diverse population and a history of balancing tradition with progress, the fallout from such legislation could keep local legal professionals busy addressing its real-world consequences.