Tuesday, the state Senate passed a bill protecting North Carolinians from revenge or coerced pornography. Early drafts of the bill had unanimous bipartisan support in the state House, but in the end only Senate Republicans voted for it, due to several anti-trans amendments added to the legislation.
Originally, House Bill 805 would have required website operators to obtain written consent and age verification from every participant featured in pornographic content before posting it online. It also would create a process by which people could request removal of content including them within 72 hours.
It was designed to protect victims of coerced consent, instances where a person consents to a sexual act or distribution of pornographic content against their will through fraud or under duress.
[Subscribe for FREE to Carolina Public Press’ alerts and weekend roundup newsletters]
But when the bill reached the Senate, legislators made several changes that “muddied the waters,” Senate Democratic Leader Sydney Batch said.
What began as a bill to protect children from being exploited online was “hijacked, gutted and replaced with language that’s not just unrelated, but dangerous,” Batch said, referencing the anti-trans measures.
The vote was accompanied by hours of partisan drama ending with nearly all Democrats losing their rights to future votes on the bill.
What’s in the bill?
The additions to House Bill 805 address Republican national culture-war issues.
First, Senate Republicans added an amendment declaring that North Carolina will only recognize two sexes in its laws and policies, in alignment with one of President Donald Trump’s early executive orders.
Second, the bill would ban use of state funds for gender transition surgeries, puberty blocking drugs or hormone therapy for individuals under custody of the Department of Adult Corrections.
DAC Secretary Leslie Cooley Dismukes testified in May that no such procedures had been performed in the state’s jails and prisons because to that point, they had not been considered medically necessary. She did not rule out the possibility of future procedures, however. Dismukes was appointed by Gov. Josh Stein, a Democrat, and confirmed by the Republican-controlled state Senate.
Third, the bill would extend the medical malpractice statute of limitations on gender transition procedures to a decade. For most procedures, the statute of limitations is three or fewer years.
Fourth, the bill requires the state registrar to keep both copies of someone’s birth certificate if they choose to change the sex on the original.
Fifth, it would allow parents to remove their students from classroom discussions, activities or assignments that they believe impose a substantial burden on their religious beliefs.
Finally, Republican lawmakers included a provision requiring public schools to post their library book catalog online, where parents can view it and opt their child out of certain books for any reason.
On Tuesday, state Sen. Buck Newton, R-Wilson, presented an amendment requiring local boards of education to ban students from sharing sleeping quarters with members of the opposite biological sex during school-sanctioned activities unless parents provide written permission. It passed along party lines.
“Across the country, we all have to recognize that women are being systematically erased from our language, and whether it’s changing words from pregnant women to pregnant person or mother to a birthing parent, these are small changes, but send a very strong message to women,” Newton said.
“We want to send them an equally strong message that women exist and they’re supported.”
Political chess
All senators had their legislative rule books close at hand Tuesday afternoon.
Democrats presented a series of floor amendments that would have returned the bill to its original form, raised the legal marriage age from 16 to 18, reimbursed rape crisis centers for lost federal funding, required people under a domestic violence protective order to surrender their firearms and extended the bill’s public school policies to private and charter schools.
But Republicans skirted the issue by either tabling the bills or presenting unrelated substitute amendments on amendments to avoid having to vote.
When it came time to vote, most Democrats voted “present,” a move often used when a legislator does not want to vote yes or no on a bill. Only state Sens. Dan Blue, D-Wake, Gladys Robinson, D-Guilford, Paul Lowe Jr., D-Forsyth, and Graig Meyer, D-Orange, voted no.
Senate President Pro Tempore Phil Berger, R-Rockingham, then called for everyone who voted present to be excused from all past and future votes on the bill, including proposed amendments and potential veto override votes.
Ultimately, Democrats’ fight against the legality of the motion failed.
In a press release, Senate Democrats explained their motivation: to illustrate that in their view Republicans weren’t focused on protecting minors, but rather, pushing a political agenda.
“Democrats refused to play along with this partisan manipulation of good public policy,” Batch said. “We tried every procedural tool we had to rescue the core purpose of this bill, which was to protect minors from sexual exploitation. When those efforts were blocked by our Republican colleagues, we took a stand.”
Tuesday’s gamesmanship is just the latest example of political maneuvering in Raleigh.
For over a month, Senate Republicans have stalled the latest Helene relief bill as a bargaining chip in ongoing budget negotiations with the House over tax policy, among other issues. Last week, Senate Democrats used the threat of a rarely used rule to force Republicans to either move on the latest Helene bill or face a politically tricky vote.
This week, Senate Republicans showed that two can play that game.
If House Republicans accept the Senate’s changes to House Bill 805 and Gov. Josh Stein vetoes the bill, Democrats will likely face a lose-lose veto override vote — those that are authorized to vote, anyways.
Either Democrats vote for the bill and face criticism for supporting anti-trans legislation, or they vote against the bill and catch flack for not passing revenge porn protections into law.
This was by design. House Republicans are one seat shy of a supermajority that can override vetoes, so they need at least one Democrat on their side to get controversial legislation to the finish line.
If you’re a progressive Democrat in a safe district, voting against the bill might not cause any damage, Meredith College political science professor David McLennan said. But if you’re a moderate Democrat in a swing district where voting against an anti-trans bill could be unpopular among your constituents, the math may be different.
“You kind of look at, well, I could be voting just for the revenge porn legislation,” McLennan said. “And, yeah, this is tough on the anti-trans, but on the other hand, it’s coming down from the federal government anyway, so I kind of have some cover there.”
A shift in public opinion on anti-trans laws
In 2016, a Republican legislature and governor passed and signed House Bill 2, a bathroom ban, into law.
It required North Carolinians, including transgender people, to use the bathroom aligned with their biological sex, assigned at birth, in schools and public agency facilities.
That measure drew public outcry. About half of Americans polled by Pew Research in 2016 said transgender people should be allowed to use the restroom aligned with their gender identity. Now, only 26% favor this policy, while half oppose it and a quarter expressed indifference, according to a 2025 Pew Research survey.
Additionally, 56% of Americans support banning health care professionals from providing minors gender transition care and 47% support banning public schools from teaching on gender identity in elementary schools.
“They really made it a big talking point to get (HB2) defeated,” McLennan said. “So the Democratic Party is in a position where they can’t show any weakness against anti-trans legislation.”
However, McLennan wouldn’t be surprised if a few more moderate Democrats in swing districts flip over to the Republican side on the issue, particularly considering current public opinion.
Democrats who vote against the bill will do so on principle, he added. It’s not necessarily politically advantageous for them anymore. And using the Republicans’ political move to add anti-trans language to a revenge porn bill for attack ads next year might not hit in the same way.
“After the 2024 election and the way that things have sort of moved in terms of public opinion, I’m not sure the Democrats would want to use that as a major part of their campaign advertising,” McLennan said.
What’s next on revenge porn and anti-trans bill?
Now, House Bill 805 moves back to the state House to approve or reject the Senate’s changes.
Sen. Lisa Grafstein, D-Wake, said the House has indicated that it would not concur with any changes to the bill.
“We will leave this building on Thursday or whenever we leave, and the House will leave, and we won’t have done something critically important, which is to ensure that there’s a way for people to challenge and appropriate intimate photos of them online,” she said.
Republicans did not appear to share Grafstein’s concern.
House Speaker Destin Hall, R-Caldwell, said Tuesday evening he hasn’t looked at the Senate’s changes, and certainly hasn’t had conversations with Senate Democrats about whether the House would concur.
Editor’s note: This article has been updated to include reaction to the Senate vote.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. You may republish our stories for free, online or in print. Simply copy and paste the article contents from the box below. Note, some images and interactive features may not be included here.
